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

Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 102 posts

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#31

Post by mikepurvis »

shunders wrote: post #17
asdgionbionio wrote: post #5

What are we doing to ourselves? If you were in the market for a new pair of shoes, what would be the sensible thing to do to get the best pair? Would you look at the glitzy ads, or would you try to choose something that is durable and comfortable for its price? Would you compare celebrity endorsements or spec sheets? There's no one in their right mind who would say the right way to buy a computer is to look at advert…

Hardly anyone is capable of drawing meaningful conclusions from comparing specs and functionality between computers. Advertisements are the way the vast majority of people understand what products can do. There's a reason iPhone commercials focus exclusively on some single, insignificant functionality like a facial recognition emoji generator.

Ironic that we've made it to that place, given that one of the huge differentiators in the early generations of iPhone was how it was advertised. The carrier ads flogging alternatives showed 3D models of the devices whizzing around the screen (the emotional play), while Apple's iPhone advertising actually showed the UI; they showed what it looked like to use it and showed it being used to do something useful.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#33

Post by grecy »

supernova87a wrote: post #28

I love that marketing works, and that people want to believe in values, and will band together over those values. However lately, I've felt that especially in the US, values -- or more accurately -- symbols of values have become more important than actual tangible outcomes or functional real achievements. For people as individuals and as groups. I guess of course that I'm especially thinking about our politics and so…

> They're all symbols of the most extreme cases, and we latch on to them because they're recognizable, inflammatory, and get us riled up to want to do something

Having moved from Australia to the US then Canada and having spent over and month in more than 50 countries around the world, I can tell you the US does this more (better?) than other countries.

The entire US system and political discourse is setup as right/wrong, black/white, right/left, and leaves no room for discussion.

In America you're either pro-life or pro-choice, pro-guns or anti-guns, etc. etc. There is no middle ground, no room for a discussion and certainly you can bet your bottom dollar nobody would ever listen to someone from the other side and perhaps learn something.

Happily, in my experience other countries are not nearly as bad as this, and I hope like hell we don't follow suit like we have with too many other bad habits of the US.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#35

Post by jackpirate »

grecy wrote: post #33
supernova87a wrote: post #28

I love that marketing works, and that people want to believe in values, and will band together over those values. However lately, I've felt that especially in the US, values -- or more accurately -- symbols of values have become more important than actual tangible outcomes or functional real achievements. For people as individuals and as groups. I guess of course that I'm especially thinking about our politics and so…

> They're all symbols of the most extreme cases, and we latch on to them because they're recognizable, inflammatory, and get us riled up to want to do something Having moved from Australia to the US then Canada and having spent over and month in more than 50 countries around the world, I can tell you the US does this more (better?) than other countries. The entire US system and political discourse is setup as right/w…

you can bet your bottom dollar nobody would ever listen to someone from the other side and perhaps learn something.

One problem with listening to the other side is that most people are so ridiculously misinformed about issues (on all sides), that listening to the average person of the other side is unlikely to make you learn something. You have to actively seek out the smartest people from the other side and listen to them, and that's a lot of work.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#36

Post by momentmaker »

supernova87a wrote: post #28

I love that marketing works, and that people want to believe in values, and will band together over those values. However lately, I've felt that especially in the US, values -- or more accurately -- symbols of values have become more important than actual tangible outcomes or functional real achievements. For people as individuals and as groups. I guess of course that I'm especially thinking about our politics and so…

That's how you sell (influence/persuade) others to do something is by engaging their emotions - the stronger the better.

Words are a tool like another other, can be used to empower others or create hatred...

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#37

Post by badpun »

asdgionbionio wrote: post #5

What are we doing to ourselves? If you were in the market for a new pair of shoes, what would be the sensible thing to do to get the best pair? Would you look at the glitzy ads, or would you try to choose something that is durable and comfortable for its price? Would you compare celebrity endorsements or spec sheets? There's no one in their right mind who would say the right way to buy a computer is to look at advert…

> This is good advice for how to make money. But bear in mind that, if you try to build a personality for your company, you are choosing something for your customers that you would never choose for yourself.

Unfortunately, treating people like gullible children is a winning strategy. I can't think of any large company that treats their customers with decency and respect.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#38

Post by AnimalMuppet »

jackpirate wrote: post #35
grecy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're all symbols of the most extreme cases, and we latch on to them because they're recognizable, inflammatory, and get us riled up to want to do something Having moved from Australia to the US then Canada and having spent over and month in more than 50 countries around the world, I can tell you the US does this more (better?) than other countries. The entire US system and political discourse is setup as right/w…

you can bet your bottom dollar nobody would ever listen to someone from the other side and perhaps learn something. One problem with listening to the other side is that most people are so ridiculously misinformed about issues (on all sides), that listening to the average person of the other side is unlikely to make you learn something. You have to actively seek out the smartest people from the other side and listen t…

> You have to actively seek out the smartest people from the other side and listen to them, and that's a lot of work.

Partly because the smartest people on the other side aren't the ones that the average person on the other side is listening to. They're lost in the noise, even for people on their own side.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#39

Post by swayvil »

I think that by "personality" he means "story".

Like, a cool story that you can somehow attach to the product. So when people see the product they also think the story.

And then they think, "woah, what a great product!". (But what they really mean is "woah, what a great story!")

I see this in the art scene. It's like the art-piece isn't enough for people. They want an artist's statement. A philosophy. Who made it, why did they make it, where did they make it. Tell me the 20-chapter story of your heroic struggle from ugliness to beauty...

(Personally, I think what's going on here is either dim art or blind people. Either of which will produce a failure to make that connection)

Which is to say, it's like people don't care what they see, hear, smell etc. What they care about is what they think. It's all about the story.

And that certainly says something about people and how they interact with reality.

Re: Minimum Viable Personality (2011)

#40

Post by johnday »

ebiester wrote: post #11
bebna wrote: post #4

Aww, I hoped for a talk about presenting the minimal needed personality as an introverted coworker to his team.

That's both easy and hard. It's not that extroverts are magically better than a neurotypical introvert, but rather that extroverts have had more practice. The irony is that I can see an introvert be quite extroverted during a D&D session, because it's a place they have practiced their social skills. For neurotypical people, I don't believe in extroverts versus introverts per se, but rather practiced with a social gro…

I worry about this framing, because it suggests that what I (and many other people who I have spoken to) experience, is somehow atypical. I have no objection to talking to people, and I have groups of friends who I like talking to and engage with well.

They're going out this evening and I'm not. Why? It's not because I don't like them, or because I don't "gel" with them - it's because it's the end of the week, and social interaction is a tiring event for me. I find it nearly impossible to concentrate on other people or what they are saying, and it only becomes more difficult over time.

It's not about practice.

To address your comment on D&D, the reason introverted people are more engaged and outspoken during a game is because that is what the game demands. If you were to ask such a person, they would say it is fun, of course, but tiring - and I know that because I am much the same way when I play D&D.

Post reply on HN