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

STFU

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 632 posts

Re: STFU

#191

Post by anymouse123456 »

It is true that this app is more hostile than asking someone to keep it down, but people should beware of either approach, as it's not unusual for the same assholes who are comfortable blasting their audio in public spaces to also be comfortable getting into a fist fight.

I have personally been threatened on multiple occasions because I asked someone to turn down (or turn off) their volume while watching videos on their phone in public.

In one instance, I was in a doctor's office waiting room and a rather large, otherwise normal-looking man (likely in his late fifties) was watching videos at full volume while 4-5 of us were sitting quietly. We were all annoyed by him and exchanging looks, so I politely asked him to mute the video or watch it outside and he stood up and started threatening to fight me in a doctor's office waiting room!

In my anecdotal experience in various tier 2 USA cities (i.e., not NY, SF, LA, etc), Gen-Xers and Boomers seem to be the worst offenders and also surprisingly, the most belligerent when confronted.

If you're going to try either approach (this app, or asking), please do not be surprised if you find yourself in a rapidly escalating confrontation that may quickly result in physical violence.

Sometimes, this calculus is more than worth it, sometimes it's not, but just don't think it can't happen.

Re: STFU

#192

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

logicx24 wrote: post #144
dekhn wrote: post #88

Here's one I don't know how to solve: at work some folks take meetings in the bathroom. They're on their phone, they walk to a stall, do their... business while doing their business, all the while talking and listening, while toilets flush in the background. I understand cultural differences but taking business meetings in the bathroom seems inappropriate under effectively all circumstances.

Robert Caro, in the LBJ series, wrote about how LBJ would use the discomfort of being the bathroom as a negotiating technique and a show of dominance. He would drag senators into the bathroom and force them to listen to him talk as he used the urinal, or force his staffers to take dictation as he took a shit.

Apparently he urinated on the shoes of a secret service agent just as a flex.

Re: STFU

#193

Post by dekhn »

krick wrote: post #172
abalashov wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the overwhelming opposition to this, and I wouldn't do it myself. However, I lead a life of very few meetings (I'd actually appreciate more--this stance puts me in a very small company, to be sure), so it's easy for me to say that one should be more judicious with one's timing. I can emphathise with someone stuck in meetings all day in a predominantly listening role, that they consider perfunctory or mos…

As a matter of fact, I do NOT understand the overwhelming opposition to this. What's your deal if a guy is good at multitasking and people on the other end of the wire don't mind it? It isn't like he is desecrating a temple, or intruding into your home and using your toilet, or jerking off in the public... Wait, actually I'd say even the latter shouldn't be your business, unless he stains something. Why cannot people…

Taking a meeting in the bathroom is desecrating the temple.

Re: STFU

#194

Post by filoleg »

krick wrote: post #172
abalashov wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the overwhelming opposition to this, and I wouldn't do it myself. However, I lead a life of very few meetings (I'd actually appreciate more--this stance puts me in a very small company, to be sure), so it's easy for me to say that one should be more judicious with one's timing. I can emphathise with someone stuck in meetings all day in a predominantly listening role, that they consider perfunctory or mos…

As a matter of fact, I do NOT understand the overwhelming opposition to this. What's your deal if a guy is good at multitasking and people on the other end of the wire don't mind it? It isn't like he is desecrating a temple, or intruding into your home and using your toilet, or jerking off in the public... Wait, actually I'd say even the latter shouldn't be your business, unless he stains something. Why cannot people…

Is this a sarcastic take?

Asking because I was pretty much on-board with the comment and took it as being fully serious, up until the point of “jerking off in public shouldn’t be anybody else’s business, unless they stain something” being mentioned.

Now, I am not so sure. Either the entire comment was sarcastic or I am missing something major. But putting jerking off in public and talking on the phone in a public bathroom into the same bucket of activities (in terms of appropriateness) feels crazy to me.

Re: STFU

#195

Post by phlo »

My go-to for situations like these: Assume that the offender _clearly_ didn't mean to behave incorrectly, and help them overcome the mistake.

Person in a public space listening to reels at full volume? Get their attention, then loudly point out that their headphones got disconnected and everybody can hear the audio.

People leaving a train or bus and leaving behind trash? Loudly let them know that they forgot their water bottle or paper bag. If it's a single item, this works doubly well if you helpfully hand them the item, too.

Re: STFU

#196

Post by closewith »

mystifyingpoi wrote: post #185
dekhn wrote: post #88

Here's one I don't know how to solve: at work some folks take meetings in the bathroom. They're on their phone, they walk to a stall, do their... business while doing their business, all the while talking and listening, while toilets flush in the background. I understand cultural differences but taking business meetings in the bathroom seems inappropriate under effectively all circumstances.

I regularly engage in meetings when taking a dump, but only when I'm working from home, and of course flushing only on mute. I don't have a problem with that, the other side has no idea where I am anyway.

Everyone knows you're in a toilet due to the acoustics, but no-one is going to bring it up out of courtesy. Everyone also thinks less of you for it.

Re: STFU

#197

Post by lbrito »

mystifyingpoi wrote: post #176
lbrito wrote: post #87

People blasting awful music any time of the day or night, anywhere (neighbours, beachgoers, public park, transit) is enough of a problem in my country (Brazil) that arduino/Raspberry Pi/ESP32-based bluetooth jammers are somewhat common. I would never try to use it though, as you can very realistically get killed in retaliation.

How could you get in trouble (aside of this probably being illegal, at least I know it is in my country)? How would people know that you are jamming the signal, and not someone else?

Non-asshole-seeming people tend to be, unbeknownst to themselves, conspicuous in these scenarios

Re: STFU

#198

Post by cvoss »

connorgurney wrote: post #31

I might be in a minority saying this - and particularly so here on HN - but I struggle to understand why you'd be willing to use a tool like this, as OP did, but not to politely ask someone to keep it down?

It's a great example of (effective, apparently) passive aggression, and, I would guess, is motivated by all the same reasons as any other kind of passive aggression. E.g., fear of open confrontation, or a desire to create a situation that is just as or more undesirable for them so that the other person actively chooses the thing you want, of their own free will.

Re: STFU

#199

Post by krick »

kstrauser wrote: post #179
krick wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a matter of fact, I do NOT understand the overwhelming opposition to this. What's your deal if a guy is good at multitasking and people on the other end of the wire don't mind it? It isn't like he is desecrating a temple, or intruding into your home and using your toilet, or jerking off in the public... Wait, actually I'd say even the latter shouldn't be your business, unless he stains something. Why cannot people…

I do not wish to hear anyone else's bathroom noises. Yes, we all use the bathroom. No, I still don't want to hear anyone else doing it.

Even that I'd call somewhat petty, but it is more defensible if it's insulting to you when you hear toilet noises from your phone, and you are totally in your right to tell it straight to the person who is calling you, that it's hard to hear him behind all farts and flushes. That's ok. People here seem to be complaining that somebody else is talking to somebody else on a phone while being in the public (office) toilet. I mean, I kinda understand if it distracts them from their business due to some psychological difficulties they may have, but that's the public toilet design fault when you cannot feel isolated enough, not the guy's talking.

Re: STFU

#200

Post by raffael_de »

connorgurney wrote: post #31

I might be in a minority saying this - and particularly so here on HN - but I struggle to understand why you'd be willing to use a tool like this, as OP did, but not to politely ask someone to keep it down?

It is very difficult to stay polite while getting very angry. Politeness is usually reserved for respectful people. If somebody acts in a way that is perceived as intentionally disrespectful (whether that's actually the case or not), there is a severe psychological dissonance to overcome. Also physiologically people will get nervous, voice shaking, facial tension and twitching, heart racing, mind getting foggy when severely agitated which makes trying to act polite even more difficult. It's easier and seemingly more sensible to just skip straight to snapping or ... bottling the rage up to eventually release it against somebody sufficiently harmless - humans are monkeys after all (which isn't even necessarily bad, we should just strive for civilizing the chimp and strengthening the bonobo within us.)
Post reply on HN