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

No Hello

nohello.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 256 posts

Re: No Hello

#121

Post by TeMPOraL »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #110
pas wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not to mention that if someone is supposed to be a professional coordinator, they would benefit from being a good communicator. starting a discussion with "hi" and disappearing for minutes is absolutely disrespectful and shitty, not to mention the opposite of efficient. they need to work on their time management.

I mean, maybe I’m rude but if someone just messages me Hi on slack I simply ignore it until they send something more substantial.

It's fine unless the other person is your superior. Too many managers are oblivious to the fact that their authority over other people's futures makes every interaction threatening by default.

Re: No Hello

#122

Post by simonw »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #116
SirFatty wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Some people are TCP. Some are UDP." Nailed it! This is going up on the wall in my office.

And some people, like me, are... what do you call TCP but without initial handshake? Like: ---- Other person: Hi, what time was that thing? Me: Hey, 14:00. ... ... Me: Hey, 14:00 ! ... ... Me: walks in their face Hey you, the thing you asked, it's at 14:00. Other person: Yes yes, I heard you first time! Me: boils internally, muttering to themselves so why the fsck didn't you say so? ---- Please don't hang on "Hello",…

Weirdly I really enjoyed MrBeast's line on this in his leaked internal production memo:

"Since we are on the topic of communication, written communication also does not constitute communication unless they confirm they read it."

https://simonwillison.net/2024/Sep/15/how-to-succeed-in-mrbe...

Re: No Hello

#123

Post by MisterTea »

I have a friend who would always text me "yo yo", which annoyed me, so I would always responded with a picture of a yo-yo. He finally got the hint and now asks "you around?" so yet again, I state I am in fact not a round anything and the saga continues...

Just ask the mother flipping question ffs!

Re: No Hello

#124

Post by dosnem »

dfboyd wrote: post #86

I'm the original author of this content. I wrote it on the internal wiki at Google in 2007. Someone copied it and posted it at nohello.(something) after I left Google. It's made the front page of HN multiple times. The discussions always split between the people who just want to get on with the conversation and the people who can't bring themselves to do that because they consider it unforgivably rude. The second gro…

Sometimes you do it because if you just ask the question you get ignored but if you say hello and get a response ppl are less likely to ignore the second question. Thats the bigger reason than any rudeness reason i would think.

Re: No Hello

#125

Post by rogerthis »

My rules: if it's a person I interact everyday, private hello (hi, hey) is ok, and answered with equivalent. If we don't interact usually or have never, if I'm the one starting, then it's "Hi, I'm ..., the one responsible for ... We have this case ... etc etc.". I accept anything.

But, anyways, it's just life, don't know why people (even from my generation) are nervous these days.

Re: No Hello

#126

Post by dosnem »

kevindamm wrote: post #111
macspoofing wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another reason for 'hello' ... it's a way to make sure you have the other person's attention before launching into a topic or question.

If the conversation needs that, many think that indicates it should be an email, or a meeting, not a chat.

No way that makes sense. Email is for external conversations. Meetings are hour long.

Re: No Hello

#127

Post by JimDabell »

macspoofing wrote: post #107
dfboyd wrote: post #86

I'm the original author of this content. I wrote it on the internal wiki at Google in 2007. Someone copied it and posted it at nohello.(something) after I left Google. It's made the front page of HN multiple times. The discussions always split between the people who just want to get on with the conversation and the people who can't bring themselves to do that because they consider it unforgivably rude. The second gro…

There's another reason for 'hello' ... it's a way to make sure you have the other person's attention before launching into a topic or question.

That’s exactly what’s rude about it. Don’t make sure you have their attention. Just send the actual message.

If it’s urgent enough that the actual message isn’t enough, “Hello” isn’t going to cut it either.

Re: No Hello

#128

Post by kevindamm »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #112
hombre_fatal wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get what this achieves since the whole reason they sent you "hello" is that they want a TCP handshake before they get on with it. So sending hello back just acks the message and they will proceed which is what they wanted. The annoyance in TFA is that you have to do the handshake at all.

Actually, when you put it like that, sending 'hello' back might be the best thing you could do. They sent you a SYN, you send back and ACK, then the real conversation can begin. I suddenly no longer agree with TFA. This makes way more sense to me in this light.

The relevance of TFA is that this only works if the initiating party is still connected, and to make matters worse there is no ERR_SOCKET_CLOSED returned by most chat clients if that party got distracted before seeing the ACK. Then minutes or hours later they get back "hey sorry, missed your reply, ${QUERY}"

when they could have just included `${QUERY}` in the initial send, or at least `framing(${QUERY})`.

Re: No Hello

#129

Post by dim13 »

I usually take it even a step further by skipping useless "hello".

Instead of "Hello, did you notice, that db is down? Can you check it please?"

Just terse "DB seems to be down. Please check it."

Re: No Hello

#130

Post by [deleted] »

kevindamm wrote: post #128
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, when you put it like that, sending 'hello' back might be the best thing you could do. They sent you a SYN, you send back and ACK, then the real conversation can begin. I suddenly no longer agree with TFA. This makes way more sense to me in this light.

The relevance of TFA is that this only works if the initiating party is still connected, and to make matters worse there is no ERR_SOCKET_CLOSED returned by most chat clients if that party got distracted before seeing the ACK. Then minutes or hours later they get back "hey sorry, missed your reply, ${QUERY}" when they could have just included `${QUERY}` in the initial send, or at least `framing(${QUERY})`.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN