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

Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

robkhenderson.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 651 posts

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#321

Post by ozim »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #145

> In contrast, children will copy every single action, including the unnecessary ones. The example that immediately springs to mind, in the tech industry, is the "Steve Jobs Asshole" archetype. Steve Jobs was a notorious manager, in that he made heavy-duty demands, did not suffer fools, and was blunt to the point of abusive. But he was also able to filter for talent, cultivate it, and encourage excellence. He wasn't…

There is also example of devs thinking they are another Linus Torvalds. Being assholes because they think they are brilliant coders. Unfortunately most of the times these people were inventing unnecessary complexity not writing some great code.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#322

Post by officialchicken »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #304
LAC-Tech wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a shame. Someone wearing business casual is so much more pleasant to the eye than typical sloppy hacker wear. Especially once you start getting older and flabbier.

Doesn’t business causal mean like slacks and a lame tucked in pastel polo shirt? I think both a suit and hacker wear are more interesting

Don't forget about the Patagonia fleece vest! Many VC firms require someone to wear one to every meeting.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#323

Post by steveBK123 »

mlyle wrote: post #289
ww520 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “My socks cost more than everything you’re wearing.” That’s a strange thing to waste money on for signaling. It just showed the lack of understanding on marginal utility on commodity items.

> It just showed the lack of understanding on marginal utility on commodity items. I think you're showing the lack of understanding of marginal utility. By the time you're spending $45k on doorknobs, $400 on socks might offer equal marginal utility per dollar.

I think a lot of what this thread shows is that everyone has a different utility function.

That's kind of whats interesting about the modern economy is we can all express our preferences in how we spend. The bottom end has gotten much cheaper and the top end has gotten exponentially more expensive, and in many markets the middle has sort of disappeared.

This contrasts a lot with the 1950s boom era where there was a big thick middle end and not a huge range from bottom to top.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#324

Post by 627467 »

wildrhythms wrote: post #69
627467 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a certain combination of work/knowledge/luck to profit from anything in life. Seems reductionist to equate buying low and selling at peak to buying a lottery ticket. But so it does to claim hard work has been the main reason why financial investors profit

>It takes a certain combination of work/knowledge/luck to profit from anything in life. Plenty of people 'profiting' on the wealth of their parents, grandparents, etc. when they themselves have never worked a day in their life and don't have much knowledge of anything. Inherited wealth is an obvious contradiction to the meritocracy that so many people believe we live within today.

If my response seemed to support the idea of meritocracy as a fact it was unintended. Obviously I missed "inheritance" or family-estate from the triad.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#325

Post by steveBK123 »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #302
steveBK123 wrote: post #47

"An example from Ogilvy Vice Chairman Rory Sutherland: If you’re a top executive, turning up to work on a bicycle is a high-status activity because it was a choice and not a necessity. But if you work at Pizza Hut, turning up on a bike means you can’t afford a car." This tidbit reminds me of a similar anecdote (that my experience aligns with) re: the modern upper class that wearing a $2k Rolex or driving a $70k BMW i…

The food part is big. It’s wild how in the US especially there are about three classes of grocery stores and each cater almost exclusively to a certain social class. You don’t see many laborers or fast food workers grabbing a meal from the local co-op or Whole Foods and the local Aldi or Walmart rarely sees an executive unless they’re infamously stingy

You see this A LOT in food spend in US especially in rich urban areas.

I have friends who would kind of scoff at a Rolex but proudly describe the latest $500-for-2 dinner they went to last week.

Similarly I had a friend who only upgraded his iPhone with hand-me-downs from his teenage daughter, so he'd be like 3-4 years behind the curve. Meanwhile he owned like 4 homes and dined out similarly to my other friend.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#326

Post by tuukkah »

throw0101c wrote: post #266
ajb wrote: post #260

As always, context is everything. Not all countersignals are that costly. For example, casual wear is common among devs. This signals that our skill set is valuable enough that we don't need to comply with corporate dress codes. Sometimes someone from a poor background turns up in a suit - for example, we had a QA guy who did, having converted from some previous career via a short course. Sometimes new grads come to…

> This signals that our skill set is valuable enough that we don't need to comply with corporate dress codes. Sometimes someone from a poor background turns up in a suit And then there's Vint Cerf.

His approach may be something best described as counter-countersignalling.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#327

Post by onetimeusename »

pfisherman wrote: post #295
onetimeusename wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rolex hatred seems like it is about expressing contempt towards the previous establishment. Presidents used to wear them (still do actually) but it's not uncommon to see very rich politicians wearing very cheap watches probably deliberately. Same goes for suit wearing. I think pg wrote an article on his blog about how suit wearing was for people who thought like conformists and obviously being a conformist was not fo…

> Wearing a suit to a tech company will probably get you ostracized even if you just like wearing suits. Not true. If you are a menswear enthusiast who is genuinely into fine tailoring, then people will respect it and even show interest. Generally, having hobbies and interests adds to one’s character. Now wearing a suit because you think it will make people take you more seriously will get you some side eye.

maybe. I'd like to think that is true but was not in my experience but I wish I had experimented more before everything went remote so maybe take what I am saying with a grain of salt on this matter. I definitely took shit for it although some people were fascinated. I think the exception is if you have long hair or are a steampunk enthusiast. I am not really kidding. Even then you might come off as odd.

I sometimes would have to go to nearby tech companies we worked with and the leads who would greet me would mention something like "oh sorry we didn't tell you that you don't have to wear a suit". You have to explain yourself and there is the implication that wearing a suit is somehow inappropriate.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#328

Post by tbrownaw »

steveBK123 wrote: post #47

"An example from Ogilvy Vice Chairman Rory Sutherland: If you’re a top executive, turning up to work on a bicycle is a high-status activity because it was a choice and not a necessity. But if you work at Pizza Hut, turning up on a bike means you can’t afford a car." This tidbit reminds me of a similar anecdote (that my experience aligns with) re: the modern upper class that wearing a $2k Rolex or driving a $70k BMW i…

> * The last round of job searching doing zoom interviews, I wore my hoodie for half the calls. If I had done this while job searching out of college, during my internship, or at my first job.. I would not be where I am today.*

That's not just status, it's got change over time mixed in.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#329

Post by notinfuriated »

adventured wrote: post #272
notinfuriated wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Steve Jobs example I immediately think of when talking about imitating unnecessary behaviors are all the people who started dressing like Steve Jobs. Elizabeth Holmes and Mark Zuckerberg come to mind as people who did this in an obvious way. But the 'asshole boss' or authority figure archetype is an old one, from long before Steve Jobs, and it can be an effective motivational tool, although many of us, myself inc…

> the people who started dressing like Steve Jobs. Elizabeth Holmes and Mark Zuckerberg come to mind as people who did this in an obvious way. Zuckerberg was never known for copying the look of Steve Jobs. I doubt you can find multiple photos from different dates that demonstrates the claim. Zuck wore zip hoodies and flip flops; the version of Jobs that Zuckerberg would have been exposed to did not dress that way (Jo…

I'm not referring to copying the actual style but rather copying the habit of wearing the same thing as a way to avoid spending time making the decision of what to wear. This concept was written about ad nauseam about a decade ago, with Jobs as the inspiration.

I don't assume Jobs was the first one to do it, and it's certainly more conspicuous that Holmes was copying Jobs' style, but I do assume that people like Zuckerberg copied Jobs directly as a result of hearing that this was some little productivity hack for Jobs. I associate this period as the same time the 'personal brand' was becoming more popular, and people started aping Steve Jobs as a way to either deceive people just through perception or as a good faith attempt to be like Steve.

https://medium.com/swlh/why-successful-people-wear-the-same-...

https://www.businessinsider.com/highly-successful-people-lik...

https://www.ctsolutionsglobal.com/post/2019/09/12/what-do-st...

https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-productivity-hack...

Here's an article that includes a quote of Zuckerberg explaining himself, which makes my speculation less of an assumption:

https://careers.workopolis.com/advice/the-reason-mark-zucker...

> “I really want to clear my life to make it so that I have to make as few decisions as possible about anything except how to best serve this community. There’s actually a bunch of psychology theory that even making small decisions, around what you wear or what you eat for breakfast or things like that, they kind of make you tired and consume your energy. My view is I’m in this really lucky position where I get to wake up every day and help serve more than 1 billion people, and I feel like I’m not doing my job if I spend any of my energy on things that are silly or frivolous about my life, so that way I can dedicate all of my energy towards just building the best products and services and helping us reach our goal and achieve this mission of helping to connect everyone in the world and giving them the ability to stay connected with the people that they love and care about. So, that’s what I care about. Even though it sounds silly that that’s my reason for wearing a grey t-shirt every day, it is true.”

> He then pointed out that others throughout history have done the same, like Steve Jobs, who was usually wearing a black mock neck.

Re: Be wary of imitating high-status people who can afford to countersignal

#330

Post by jterwill »

burlesona wrote: post #183
gus_massa wrote: post #56

> If a chimpanzee views a person perform a series of superfluous actions, along with one single necessary action, in order to obtain a piece of food, the chimpanzee will skip the superfluous action, and perform only the necessary one. > In contrast, children will copy every single action, including the unnecessary ones. I watched the video, but I'm unconvinced. They tell the kid the box is " magic ". Children know th…

I also wondered about the difference between doing this with young children and adult chimps. I think it’s fairly obvious that if you gave the clear box test to a teenager or adult and said “get the treat out” they’d look at you funny and then many or most would just reach in and grab it. I think even in the black box, they’d probably look at it real hard and maybe try going straight for the treat after investigating…

They have tried this with juvenile non-human primates! For example, Horner & Whiten (2005) tried this with 2-6 year old chimpanzees. Clay & Tennie (2017) tried this with juvenile bonobos. Neither group overimitated. They do play, but overimitation is probably underpinned by the ability/proclivity to infer Gricean intentions, which non-human primates lack.

There is a strong normative element to this, as well as the play element you mentioned — I expect, as adults, we’ve all engaged in some form of overimitation as an act of conformity.

Post reply on HN