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

Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 246 posts

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#191

Post by ptx »

sneak wrote: post #144
typhonic wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 30 years ago I was being asked by some guy I barely knew to do something over the weekend. I didn't know how to tell him that I would rather just be at home with my family. Eventually and without thinking it through, I just said "It's my weekend with the kids." He instantly became apologetic and said he understood completely. And I instantly felt like a heel for pretending to be someone I'm not. I had accidenta…

It’s not your fault that the listener assumed you were divorced; you implied it (accidentally) but did not state it. You were not untruthful-what you said was literally and exactly correct. The assumptions made by a listener as a result of intentionally limited data are not your responsibility in any way, indeed even if you were able to predict them with any reasonable level of accuracy, which you are not. I have an…

This is called a lie by omission.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie#Types

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#192

Post by asjw »

jarofgreen wrote: post #164
sneak wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not your fault that the listener assumed you were divorced; you implied it (accidentally) but did not state it. You were not untruthful-what you said was literally and exactly correct. The assumptions made by a listener as a result of intentionally limited data are not your responsibility in any way, indeed even if you were able to predict them with any reasonable level of accuracy, which you are not. I have an…

Thinking about fault and responsibility is maybe misleading? If I'm trying to communicate a thing to another person and I fail, I've failed. Totally failed. Whether that bothers me or not depends on the context, sometimes it does. And it seems like at those points just saying "Well I made noises, it's the others persons fault they couldn't understand me, nothing to do with me" is an attitude that isn't going to get m…

You also have to ignore the listener that don't listen or that don't understand, despite others did or have never put themselves in the condition of needing an explanation.

Basically communication is bidirectional, if the listener don't understand anything, it's probably their fault too.

Understanding is not a right or a gift, it's a process.

You can't force people to understand and no matter how you think about the listener, the listener have to do their part: listen.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#193

Post by asjw »

nimbius wrote: post #173
notacoward wrote: post #67

I've found that pretending to know someone's profession, or one related to it, is generally a very bad approach. It's easily seen through, at which point you're worse off than before. Instead, what I do with members of other professions is try to impress on them that I do not know their business but respect its complexity and our roles within the scenario. Whether it's a doctor or a plumber or even a computer technic…

Speaking as an automotive mechanic and a tradesman, nothing sounds more despicable than this half-ass attempt to "game" human interaction to save a few precious seconds in your day. You wouldn't do this with a doctor. You wouldn't do it with a police officer. So why do it with me? Or tech people? Are they somehow less impressive? I mean you are seeking their help. Maybe show some respect. if you're ever at the garage…

I do it with the doctor!

We have mandatory visits at work here in Italy and to save time when I go there, instead of following the usual routine, I say immediately: my grandfather suffered from high pressure, my mom has been curing her high pressure her entire life, I also probably have it so if you find high pressure, I know everything about it already. Also my parents worked in healthcare, you can use medical terms, I get those.

I also tells them I suffer from a genetic heart condition, not worrying, but existent.

It's called anamnesi, it's a necessary process to establish the patient's background and saves a lot of time to the both of us.

They don't have to explain to me that I should avoid using salt and all the side effects of a condition I know very well and I don't have to listen to things I already know, since 40 years ago.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#194

Post by asjw »

GuB-42 wrote: post #105
notacoward wrote: post #67

I've found that pretending to know someone's profession, or one related to it, is generally a very bad approach. It's easily seen through, at which point you're worse off than before. Instead, what I do with members of other professions is try to impress on them that I do not know their business but respect its complexity and our roles within the scenario. Whether it's a doctor or a plumber or even a computer technic…

Always assume competence is, I think, a good strategy. People are more willing to help if you flatter their ego. And most importantly, sometimes, people really are competent.

It doesn't take you anywhere if they always answer "you use Linux? It must be that"

Assume competence if they show competence

If they don't, assume they will be part of the problem, you won't get any help and they will make the situation worse

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#195

Post by btrettel »

maccard wrote: post #187
btrettel wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This hasn't been my experience. I can recall one time where, after spending hours on the phone getting nowhere, I mentioned getting a lawyer involved. The company forwarded me to someone with a title like "solutions architect" who quickly solved the problem I was having. The other people I spoke with wouldn't even answer basic questions. It probably helped that the company is in a highly regulated industry.

I used to work in IT support. Maybe 3/4 times a year, we would get an irate customer who would drop mention of a lawyer, usually they were awkward and unhelpful in the first place. Our MO was to escalate to our legal team (who worked one day a week with us), run everything through them, and make no attempts to go above and beyond to remedy the issue. Every time, without fail, it would have been easier for everyone in…

As I recall, I politely spoke with multiple support agents for over an hour, carefully explaining my problem, before I tried to wrap up by saying that I was going to talk with a lawyer because this isn't going anywhere and I have legal rights in this situation. I don't recall threatening to sue them [0], just saying that I was going to talk to a lawyer. That's when the conversation changed. The person they transferred me to was very helpful. The problem was resolved within minutes of being transferred.

I was completely serious about talking to a lawyer about this by the way. And they understood what my problem was. I'd guess that the support agents I spoke with were not authorized to do what I asked. They never told me that, though, they just refused to help. If I had to guess I'd say that they weren't authorized to transfer me to the right person unless I said certain keywords, "lawyer" being one of them.

[0] Maybe I did, as I was really frustrated after over an hour on the phone. But I only intended to talk to a lawyer.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#196

Post by rgossiaux »

laretluval wrote: post #183
FabHK wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many languages adopt words, but English does so to an unusual degree. As a consequence, it is the language that has most words today, by far.

Is there a citation for that?

No, because it's not scientific. There's no agreed upon definition of what counts as a unique word. Do you count every inflected form, like "dog" and "dogs"? Derivations from other words? Homonyms? Compound words? How do you deal with archaic or obsolete words? And so on...

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#197

Post by sneak »

ptx wrote: post #191
sneak wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not your fault that the listener assumed you were divorced; you implied it (accidentally) but did not state it. You were not untruthful-what you said was literally and exactly correct. The assumptions made by a listener as a result of intentionally limited data are not your responsibility in any way, indeed even if you were able to predict them with any reasonable level of accuracy, which you are not. I have an…

This is called a lie by omission . https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie#Types

> Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions.

By this logic, one can lie by remaining entirely silent. I don't buy it.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#198

Post by zajio1am »

jarofgreen wrote: post #164
sneak wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not your fault that the listener assumed you were divorced; you implied it (accidentally) but did not state it. You were not untruthful-what you said was literally and exactly correct. The assumptions made by a listener as a result of intentionally limited data are not your responsibility in any way, indeed even if you were able to predict them with any reasonable level of accuracy, which you are not. I have an…

Thinking about fault and responsibility is maybe misleading? If I'm trying to communicate a thing to another person and I fail, I've failed. Totally failed. Whether that bothers me or not depends on the context, sometimes it does. And it seems like at those points just saying "Well I made noises, it's the others persons fault they couldn't understand me, nothing to do with me" is an attitude that isn't going to get m…

I would say that responsibility for success in communication depends mainly on intentional aspects of the communication and may fall on either speaker or listener (or both).

I.e., both sides have some level of expected interest/gain in successful communication and that makes each of them implicitly responsible (at least to themselves) for their part of gain from communication.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#199

Post by fortran77 »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #184
fortran77 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is in poor taste to refer to the Hebrew Bible as the "old Testament."

It’s common usage within the Christian community to refer to it as such. Christianity’s roots are in Judaism - and that fact doesn’t constitute poor taste. So neither does using the Christian term for the Tanakh within a Christian context. Now, knowingly calling it that to a Jew might possibly be interpreted as a form of disrespect, but in my experience most Jews don’t mind at all. It’s a shared scripture, so there’s…

Saying that the bible of a certain religion is obsolete and has been superseded (which is what "old" means in this sense) can't be interpreted kindly to say the least. You have every right to feel that it is obsolete, of course, but you should at least realize that this is not going to be considered well by the people whose holy books you appropriated, modified, and replaced.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#200

Post by mirimir »

mirimir wrote: post #2

> Any bureaucracy: Present as if you are collecting a paper trail. Prominent indicia of this include notebooks, organized files, and repeatedly asking for specific names, dates, and citations for authority “for my notes.” This is my wife. A survivor of over three decades in the corporate world.

Edit: I wasn't clear that I respect her hugely for this.
Post reply on HN