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

631–640 of 651 posts

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

#631

Post by StanislavPetrov »

Tarq0n wrote: post #261
helen___keller wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> wearing a $2k Rolex or driving a $70k BMW is frowned upon. But instead they have eccentric "hobbies" requiring $10ks of of equipment, inclusive of "needing" $10k viking stove/range, and $10k subzero fridge/freezer in your kitchen because you are a "foodie" […] Isn’t this conflating status signal with lifestyle? The wealthy have always enjoyed expensive lifestyles and hobbies. In and of itself, expensive hobby equip…

A sociologist would tell you that there is no such thing as a lifestyle which isn't a performance of one's status.

Reason 5,434 why sociology is a not a science.

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

#632

Post by themacguffinman »

aebtebeten wrote: post #568
themacguffinman wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Higher EV in that play allowing increased chances to mingle with rich class" means that your intended audience is the actually rich people because you want to mingle with them.

I stand corrected; in that case I'd wholeheartedly agree. Do you have any concrete instances of when/where one might do this? (I'm having a failure of imagination, because IMX in capitalist countries people dress to impress their peers; the system is self-sorting as in Brave New World)

A techy scenario I just made up: you're in a common space (eg a bar, gym, or conference) in San Francisco where rich venture capitalists tend to visit, so you dress like they do to fit in. Your goal isn't exactly to portray yourself as rich, but you want to portray yourself as a certain class: not necessarily a millionaire but someone who is doing well and has industry experience & connections and looks like they could lead a successful startup.

One approach is to dress like other famous & successful tech founders: a nice T-shirt & hoodie. T-shirt & hoodie is also just comfortable and common, which is exactly why those famous & successful founders wear it, they're not showing off traditionally by wearing $10,000 tailored suits, they're wearing a T-shirt & hoodie that anyone could wear. Dressing up with a fancy suit might actually look odd amongst the Silicon Valley upper class.

Edit: Another interesting example I thought of when replying to another comment is in luxury retail stores, fancy/business clothing used to be such a strong signal of high status that retail workers there would often ignore you if you walked in wearing T-shirt & jeans because they'd think you couldn't afford it. Nowadays, that's a lot less likely, they know too many people dress like this for a retail worker to safely assume anything. There are a lot of wealthy people who aren't in the news all the time and a lot of them don't dress like a traditionally wealthy person.

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

#633

Post by themacguffinman »

bulbosaur123 wrote: post #606
themacguffinman wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the actually rich people are dressing down-to-earth, why would you dress fancily to appear rich? Surely you want to also dress down-to-earth so you appear like the rich people do.

Because if are a nobody and noone recognizes your face people will heuristically assume you aren't a "down to earth billionaire", but are instead just a poor, average person and thus insignificant. Zuck can appear to be humble in his clothes, because everyone knows who Zuck is and people expect famous billionaires to be smug assholes, so this is a way to countersignal and pretend to be "just like one of you, guys". S…

You may not be mistaken as a famous tech billionaire, but you may be mistaken as a well-to-do tech worker or even a tech startup lottery winner.

An example of this is in luxury retail stores, fancy/business clothing used to be such a strong signal of high status that retail workers there would often ignore you if you walked in wearing T-shirt & jeans because they'd think you couldn't afford it. Nowadays, that's a lot less likely, they know too many people dress like this for a retail worker to safely assume anything. There are a lot of wealthy people who aren't in the news all the time and a lot of them don't dress like a traditionally wealthy person.

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

#634

Post by manigandham »

vintermann wrote: post #592
manigandham wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having plenty of experience in both the car and watch worlds, what you're saying is somewhat true but it's based on brands, models and exclusivity rather than the price (which is a derivative of those factors). It's knowing which car or watch to buy, and also recognizing it on others, that acts as the signal.

This rings true to me. My hobbies aren't especially expensive, but in all of them there are certainly ways to spend money that would tell me that you don't "get it". "It" being what I find interesting about the hobby. Not that it's necessarily worse or that I want to pass judgment on it, just that the connection isn't there. But I wonder, in cultures very different from mine, which we generally see as more status-com…

Not faux pas, but there are obviously "cool" items. Often it's because of some history, provenance, technology/construction, or some other story that bestows that notoriety and a few times it's just because the group collective considers it special.

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

#635

Post by b112 »

jhauris wrote: post #529
b112 wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(notice he still wore a suit while testifying to Congress though). Don't like the guy, his company, his policies. And I tend to repect our elected officals more than most. But the idea of showing up dressed in a t-shirt and jeans, and/or a hoodie, make me smile broadly.

You may enjoy Dee Snider's speech to the Senate: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0Vyr1TylTE

Amusing, thanks. Doubly amusing that the garb was a strategy.

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

#636

Post by [deleted] »

vineyardmike wrote: post #427
pclmulqdq wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a bit of an idea now that you should be expressing yourself with your money, not expressing society's ideas. Around cars and watches, this creates a little bit of a "dead zone" for prestigious professionals. For example, if you aren't showing up in a $200k Maserati, your car had better be under $50k (maybe $70k with inflation). Only posers who aren't really into cars but want to show off their wealth…

> Clothing seems to be the same at many companies: you had better wear tailored suits and shirts or be less dressy than "business casual." There’s a running joke in my circle about the “dad professional class”. People who are older (40-60s) and go to the office in a remote-work-accepting world mostly because they seem to want to leave their family at home. They all dress like shit in ill-fitting clothes, but because…

[deleted]

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

#637

Post by [deleted] »

vineyardmike wrote: post #427
pclmulqdq wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a bit of an idea now that you should be expressing yourself with your money, not expressing society's ideas. Around cars and watches, this creates a little bit of a "dead zone" for prestigious professionals. For example, if you aren't showing up in a $200k Maserati, your car had better be under $50k (maybe $70k with inflation). Only posers who aren't really into cars but want to show off their wealth…

> Clothing seems to be the same at many companies: you had better wear tailored suits and shirts or be less dressy than "business casual." There’s a running joke in my circle about the “dad professional class”. People who are older (40-60s) and go to the office in a remote-work-accepting world mostly because they seem to want to leave their family at home. They all dress like shit in ill-fitting clothes, but because…

[deleted]

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

#638

Post by fennecfoxy »

astrange wrote: post #517
nobodyandproud wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I like t-shirts and jeans and never want to go back to suits and ties but.. When I went to Japan a decade ago, I realized just how informal and slovenly American working attire had become.

Japanese suits/uniforms are often pretty cheap (and look that way) - thus the low end “recruit suit”. They are tailored, but the level of body-fitting they are would be actively unacceptable in the US. By which I mean, everyone would think you’re gay. On the other hand, Japan is the home of expensive high end recreations of American casual clothes - look up Take Ivy, BEAMS, nice selvedge jeans, etc.

>By which I mean, everyone would think you’re gay. Is this really true, though? Plenty of straight dudes wear tight fitting clothing, especially if they work out.

Perhaps it's just a higher ratio of gay guys that work out vs straight guys that work out that's skewed your views.

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

#639

Post by asoneth »

kelnos wrote: post #345
steveBK123 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I am only trying to illustrate that the line between luxury/excess in autos has shifted substantially in the last few years partially inflation driven and partially cheap credit / long loan terms driven. The universe of under-$30k cars is now quite limited whereas 5 years ago, one could possibly describe $30k+ as being luxury.

Hell, somehow my brain is still stuck in the 90s, where $30k would get you a very nice car indeed. I was a teenager then, so perhaps I'm anchored there because it's when I first started getting interested in things like that, and first started driving. (Gas was also 92 cents per gallon for a bit while I was in high school, oof.) My family also always only bought used cars (and I continued this practice), so I guess t…

I could have written the same comment and have mixed feelings about turning into the old person who feels that everything was cheaper "back in my day".

I try and remind myself that for the most part it's not that cars are that much more expensive but that dollars are worth so much less.

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

#640

Post by yunwal »

nostrademons wrote: post #515
yunwal wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rich people probably only care about the first few years of ownership since after a few years they’ll upgrade the the newer model.

Right, but this subthread is explicitly about efficiency , i.e. getting value & quality for your money, and not about what's adapted to rich people's lifestyles. The context is people who cook a lot but don't spend a lot of money vs. people who cook only infrequently but spend a lot on kitchen appliances.

> Is the Honda or Toyota really meaningfully more reliable during the first couple of years of ownership?

It sounds like the comment you replied to was not about efficiency, but about rich people's preferences and whether they're justified.

Post reply on HN