Live data from Hacker News

30 minutes with a stranger

pudding.cool

221–230 of 406 posts

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#221

It's the internet. When you talk to people online, it often descends into pettiness. When you talk to people in the real world, that rarely happens. But it's much easier to talk online, so people get the wrong impression. You should talk to strangers. It's never gone wrong for me. Most people have a warmth and agreeableness that comes out when you are there with them, talking about stuff. There's also the interesting…

> I also find when I have a real disagreement with someone, it's a lot easier when you're face-to-face. For instance, I have friends who are religious, in a real way, ie they actually think there's a god who created the earth and wants us to live a certain way. Being there in person keeps me from ridiculing them like I might on an internet forum, but it also keeps them from condemning me to hell.

My life experience differs: I, for example, am likely more disagreeable in real life than on the internet. :-)

In internet forums, all answers are "delayed" (since you have to put them into a coherent text). Thus you rather have to think through your arguments, and thus react less on impulse (the impulse is typically already over when you have finalized your post). On the other hand, in real life, things that you strongly disagree with might trigger a very spontaneous emotional reaction.

Also, in internet forums, you want to "win internet points". Thus, you only tangentially write your arguments for the counterpart (who you will likely not convince), but more importantly to convince the many people who read your post. So your arguments are better well-thought and well-researched.

In real life, there is often no additional audience to appreciate and be convinced by "your great arguments" ;-) so it's an "all-or-nothing" to bring the truth to this ignorant being. Since the counterpart has such as "stupid" opinion, rational arguments are likely not the best way for this (because if the counterpart was capable of rational thinking, they would immediately see how "stupid" their opinion is ;-) ), so you better "hammer" your arguments into the counterpart. :-)

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads are agents in a zero-sum war for your attention. If you have focus, if you're not aimlessly wandering around, ads try to distract you. They attack your personal agency and sovereignty, trying to divert you from what you were doing, to pay attention to what they're pushing. Because they're in a zero sum competition, the dynamics are to escalate. There's only so much inventory, and the winners of the bids for your…

All of this is true for a large portion of web ads. Then there is the ad for your kids' school fundraiser. Or the ad for a used car that your cousin would love. Or the poster for the concert at your local community hall. These ads also are "trying to divert you from what you were doing, to pay attention to what they're pushing". Yet these feel ads differently despite also being "agents in a zero-sum war for your atte…

You are deliberately confusing ads with things that already have better names, such as notices or listings. They feel different because they ARE different.

Advertising is wildly successful because it's literally everywhere and we are conditioned from birth that the whole concept of "strangers using psychological tricks so you give them your money" is just a normal fact of everyday life. Most people are NOT conditioned to be on-guard against ads, and that is the whole problem. It's not until you make the choice to actively avoid ads where possible and give up ad-laden media consumption altogether for a while that you notice how bad (and bad for you) advertising is.

If you haven't tried switching to a low-advertising diet, you are probably missing out on the ability to focus on what really matters in life.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#224

I'm increasingly convinced that social isolation is the single great social ill of our time. I am not one for "respecting others' opinions" at all, make no mistakes, if someone believes something incorrect - or worse - then they need to be corrected. But so much of the hate simmering away like a pot about to boil over is the result of loneliness. The evidence on this is startingly clear. https://www.sciencedirect.com…

>I am not one for "respecting others' opinions" at all, make no mistakes, if someone believes something incorrect - or worse - then they need to be corrected.

This seems wildly incompatible with the desire to not have social isolation.

I agree with the rest of your sentiment, but that is a really anti-social idea.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#225

I'm increasingly convinced that social isolation is the single great social ill of our time. I am not one for "respecting others' opinions" at all, make no mistakes, if someone believes something incorrect - or worse - then they need to be corrected. But so much of the hate simmering away like a pot about to boil over is the result of loneliness. The evidence on this is startingly clear. https://www.sciencedirect.com…

Had a chat about this with a friend yesterday. In richer societies you can afford to be alone. This isn't good for tribal beings, humans didn't evolve as lone wolves. Even something as cooking for more than one person involves so much interaction. At the lower end of the global income scale , you can't afford to be alone in your giant house. You might need to share communal goods. Not everyone, but just having a role…

I mean its definitely a factor. There are many factors. I think another is if you are even part of the same culture as your neighbor.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#226
post #218

This is interesting, but I’m curious how much of the effect is due to getting paid $15, and how much the data was affected by the fact that everyone was isolated in COVID lockdown at the time.

Another potential self-selection bias -- if people know they are signing up to have a conversation with a stranger, perhaps they are already predisposed to be more "pleasant" in conversations, vs a potential curmudgeon who doesn't ever want to speak to anyone, even for money.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this is true for a large portion of web ads. Then there is the ad for your kids' school fundraiser. Or the ad for a used car that your cousin would love. Or the poster for the concert at your local community hall. These ads also are "trying to divert you from what you were doing, to pay attention to what they're pushing". Yet these feel ads differently despite also being "agents in a zero-sum war for your atte…

You are deliberately confusing ads with things that already have better names, such as notices or listings. They feel different because they ARE different. Advertising is wildly successful because it's literally everywhere and we are conditioned from birth that the whole concept of "strangers using psychological tricks so you give them your money" is just a normal fact of everyday life. Most people are NOT conditione…

I am taking a broader definition of ad to include things that also have other names.

- job ads and classified ads that can also be called listings

- ads for events that can also be called notices

- product description on services like Amazon and Ebay

- websites describing products and services

- 1st hand and 2nd hand mentions of products and services online that can be as close to the

Some of the comments here seem to hold only for a narrow definition of ads.

I prefer to think of all of this as marketing, as ads are part of the marketing mix. As we see, the distinction between ads and other similar things is blurry.

I am not defending the volume of ads. There's way too much of it. I am making the unconventional and unpopular statement that sometimes marketing and ads do deliver value.

It's better to narrow the critique of ads the way you did because that leads to a more constructive conversation.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#228

I know it's supposed to be fancy and cool looking but this sort of website design where you have to scroll and then the whole screen animates really bothers me. It actually gives me a headache to try and follow it versus normal scrolling behaviour and text. As soon as I start scrolling down and I can't scroll normally and images and text start flying around I feel a disturbing feeling in my head and lose concentratio…

I had NO IDEA that it scrolled until reading this comment. I was wondering wtf the page was about.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#229
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> first and foremost informs I'd claim any extent to which ads inform the viewer is downstream of the ultimate goal of having people spend money on the product. The company behind the ad does not inherently care about you being informed, just that informing people (in very selective ways) sometimes happens to be an effective way to increase sales. Where it better serves their purpose to mis inform, that's what they d…

Companies exist to make money. They use marketing as part of that process. However, we can not forget that consumers derive value from the things that companies sell. If we only focus on the big bad companies, then it is not possible to see how marketing could also serve the consumer. Believe it or not, some people do enjoy a sugary drink from time to time. While I don't drink soft drinks regularly, I recently discov…

> Believe it or not, some people do enjoy a sugary drink from time to time

But does that mean spending billions in resources on getting people to consume more sugary drinks is a net positive?

I don't think so. I think the goal of having more people consume sugary drinks is a net negative even if it were achieved for free, and that the direction our decision-making needs to be pushed (if at all) is towards consuming fewer sugary drinks (to counteract our evolutionary bias towards consuming more than is healthy for us), and probably spending less of our time hearing/thinking about them too.

> One problem is that people sometimes think of ads as only web display ads. They are not aware that there are many other kinds of ads. Independent review sites, travel blogs, [...]

Still seems to come back to the same issue - sure you can hold a broad definition of "ads" that includes independent travel blogs if you want, but that isn't what the "fellow techy, working on serving ads" in question is working on, or what people are talking about when they complain about someone being paid to shove a product in their face unsolicited when they're trying to look at something else.

Re: 30 minutes with a stranger

#230
I've been interested in this general question for a while. Years ago I ran a startup that connected strangers for spoken conversations. After tests, we kept it to audio only - no video, no text, no profile info. That was what kept the conversations civil. Add video, or text, or profiles and behavior changed (basically became a dating site). Results: F-M talks were only about 10% longer than F-F and M-M talks.

(Longer-term we focused on connecting people recovering from serious health issues.)

Post reply on HN