Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Worst Roommate Ever

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 290 posts

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#241

Post by jacobolus »

closeparen wrote: post #228
jacobolus wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it destroyed someone's life to go without a camera then this would be a reasonable analogy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_housing

If you want a closer analogy, we don’t require grocery stores to tolerate shoplifters; we have food stamps and soup kitchens.

Do you think immediate eviction as a remedy for late rent is comparable to fines for shoplifting?

If we had adequate state-provided housing available at short notice for any household, as a social safety net, then laws about eviction could be considerably stricter without violating renter’s basic human rights. I doubt you’ll find much support for that policy change from landlords though; the competition would likely reduce prevailing rents quite a bit.

Clearly tenant rights aren’t (and shouldn’t be) unlimited, but the protections for tenants currently in place were established to counter bad abuses by landlords.

Various measures to preventing shoplifting (whether food or cameras) are not really comparable in my opinion.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#242

Post by oceanghost »

Momquist wrote: post #59
IntronExon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, gut reactions to sociopaths and psychopaths are a thing. Too often though people take your view of it, and try to rationalize that feeling away. I’d rather trust my gut and ignore the pretty mediocre studies about unconscious bias that seem hard to replicate, thanks.

Gut reactions to psychopaths tend to be the opposite: they are charming, and charismatic. Theres's a very good chance that you will like them, from the first impression. That's one of the traits/signs of a psychopath. That's why you shouldn't trust your gut, at least not in this case. And the experiences of the victims in the article reinforce this point, at least in the first encounters: a courtly gentleman , he was…

No. It's in the eyes. If you know what you look for, psychopaths eyes are different. I can't explain it in physical terms, but when I look into a psychopaths eyes, there's nothing there.

Also, psychopaths don't have a startle reflex (but sociopaths do). So, drop a dish and see if they jump.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#243

Post by turc1656 »

mieseratte wrote: post #213
kelukelugames wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just going to post this quote about going with your gut from Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "But one example of the unconscious bias that still exists was a Title VII suit brought in the late 70s, and the plaintiffs were women who had not succeeded in getting middle management jobs at AT&T. They did very, very well on all the standard criteria, but they flunked disproportionately at the last stage, and what was that last s…

Sure, using your gut instinct in things like hiring, things where we want and need to be as objective as possible, is probably a recipe for bias and that's bad. Interviewing for roommates is something different, more intimate. You're going to be sharing space with this person and letting your gut reject someone is fine. If you're not comfortable having a female rommate, fine. If you're not comfortable with someone, f…

I get what you're saying but I never understood why people make a distinction between doing it in your private life vs doing it on the job. Yes, I understand that it's more intimate and personal, as you mentioned. But why is it inherently more acceptable to do when, for example, finding a roommate? I mean a lot of us spend more time with coworkers than family. Is it simply because laws require business practices to not discriminate against protected classes? Or is there something more to this line of thinking? Like a moral justification for the personal case or something like that.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#244

Post by stevenwoo »

ghaff wrote: post #232
mnw21cam wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy cow! About yet more things. I think the last time I bought anything at a shop with a cheque was 1997. I think almost all shops around here (UK) stopped accepting them a long time ago.

It's pretty uncommon in the US to pay at a store with a check. I certainly haven't done it in years and it's probably been a long time since I've seen anyone else do it. Larger retail chains tend to use some sort of electronic check verification system but they don't make it easy to pay by check (if they allow it at all) and it's pretty rare these days. However, it's still the norm to pay service people who come to y…

I still see people in grocery stores paying by check and I live in Silicon Valley. It's usually older people.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#245

Post by [deleted] »

ambicapter wrote: post #189
maaaats wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very non-charitable way of reading my statement, I believe you are very sure you're not reading it correctly. But yes, I do "believe it should be a human right to have a home to live in". Not given freely, but having the opportunity for housing. It's even in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Going from "Having a house to live in should be a right" to "having the opportunity for housing should be a right" is a very non-charitable way of arguing.

[deleted]

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#246

Post by lagadu »

microcolonel wrote: post #164
jacobolus wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it destroyed someone's life to go without a camera then this would be a reasonable analogy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_housing

It destroys a landlord's life if their primary asset is turned unfairly into a liability.

That's what's usually known as risk. They invested in an asset to provide their livelihood, that form of income has a set of risks associated with it, just like having a job carries a risk of losing it or how investing in securities carries its own risk.

How much are we willing to protect the investor from risk, in this particular case, at the potential expense of a tenant's ability to have shelter? Obviously we need some form of balance but the finer details of it are wildly arguable.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#247

Post by creep »

"... they handed him the Rubbermaid bins and Abigail. But Bachman was enraged when they declined to give back Zachary — they had sent him to live with a woman in the suburbs, and the judge had permitted her to keep him. "

God, that hurt. I actually do feel sorry for this man.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#248

Post by BrandoElFollito »

jsjohnst wrote: post #140
dalore wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone dies and does not pay, and it still takes a year to kick them out, won't the body be severely decomposed then?

s/dies/does/ And it’ll make more sense to you.

Thanks. The joy of commenting on a mobile...

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#250

Post by nwatson »

vanderZwan wrote: post #150
nwatson wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the pointer to the book, quite interesting so far. The author talks of psychopathy as an "adaptation" and not a "brokenness" in an individual ... but the adaptation so far mentioned is only in the sense of "the relatively small number of psychopaths is adapted to prey on other humans". I suppose that having too many psychopaths would render human trust very frail and would make a society prone to failure (…

> EDIT: actually, there's the brilliant Marlon Brando speech in Apocalypse Now ( https://simonamooon.deviantart.com/journal/Apocalypse-Now-Ho... ), where he describes bastards with empathy, people who love their families yet are able to perform the unthinkable atrocities [on their family] to win. So these folks are the opposite of psychopaths -- they do terrible things when necessary and doubtless feel the anguish of…

>>> Psychopathy is not the reason behind this scenario

... yeah, that's why I said "So these folks are the opposite of psychopaths".

Post reply on HN