Live data from Hacker News

The XY Problem (2014)

xyproblem.info

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#41
post #9
post #8

I often encounter the opposite. I would have a complex problem that I can legitimately solve by something reasonably simple yet I don’t posses the expertise on. Asking how to do Y, I need to spend an godawful amount of time wasting to convince people that no, it really is not an XY problem, and could we just focus on the literal problem description, which you could answer in like 3 minutes, instead of you trying to s…

I like to call this the "YZ answer"; I'm asking Y, which is the actual question I have, but someone else tries to convince me that my "real" question is "Z" because they happen to know the answer to that. Tangentially related, but does anyone else besides me have an irrationally strong dislike of the name "XY problem" for this phenomenon? I feel like that name could apply equally well to basically any problem where y…

I refer you to Mark-Jason Dominus's original explanation of what X and Y had to be. It got renamed "XY Problem" after the fact, and that name didn't take off for a long time, really not until Stack Overflow appeared and became popular, well over a decade after MJD posted about this and well after many of us had for that time not been calling it this on volunteer-support mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups.

* https://jdebp.uk/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.h...

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#42
In my org there are a few persons who really like to link to this site.

It often comes of as condescending. Like, “are you sure you really know what you’re doing?”.

In their case, it’s also a giveaway that they are not good at seeing things from someone else’s perspective. Because if they were, they could approach the question in a much more constructive and graceful manner.

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#43
post #8

I often encounter the opposite. I would have a complex problem that I can legitimately solve by something reasonably simple yet I don’t posses the expertise on. Asking how to do Y, I need to spend an godawful amount of time wasting to convince people that no, it really is not an XY problem, and could we just focus on the literal problem description, which you could answer in like 3 minutes, instead of you trying to s…

I'm sorry, but if people often do this to you, maybe reflect on them actually being right? Or that you're legitimately asking a stupid question given your self-proclaimed lack of expertise? People don't answer that way to be smug or so. They do it because the thankless person they're spending their own free time helping will just come back with a new asinine question the moment one answers their posed question. It's…

People do it often because it's a cheap way to feel smart without putting in any effort. It's the same reason how people mention Dunnking-Kruger any chance they can.

I doubt adding full context would help much in terms of getting a quality answer. Someone who answers questions in good faith will answer if they are there. All it would do is remove all the XY people I guess

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#44
post #40
post #2

In my life experience, 95% of the troubles with the XY problem stem from the fact that the people are not aware that they have over-fixated on the potential solution Y for the problem X. They quickly assumed it, solidified it in their heads, and then most of the time spent with them is allocated to making them disentangle Y from X. Once that happens, the solution has usually presented itself already at this point --…

In my case it's very often the opposite: I have already thoroughly examined potential solutions Z, W, V, and Q, and have found them to be unworkable, decided that Y is the path forward, but am not sure how to implement it. And then I have to spend two hours explaining X, and then patiently explaining why Z, W, V, and Q don't work before my colleagues finally agree with me that Y is what we need to do. Sure, very very…

This is what working with people is like. You will need to make your case and get buy-in from people if you expect their support. You can't just bluntly expect them to respect your conclusion. If you fixate on your conclusion, you will be unable to explain your reasoning getting there, since it will seem irrelevant to you now that you are sure your conclusion is solid.

Understanding what doesn't work is also an important part of understanding the problem.

If One Is Truly to Succeed in Leading a Person to a Specific Place, One Must First and Foremost Take Care to Find Him Where He is and Begin There. -- Kirkegaard

I am often in a situation where a developer is asking help for Y and I'm wondering why he's doing that instead of Z, W, etc. He might be right in going for Y, but I still need to adopt his reasoning, if I am to defend the solution on a system and organizational levels, for reasons like budget/resource/risk/customer experience/technical debt, and ensure buy-in from other stakeholders (product managers, commercial stakeholders etc).

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#45
post #6

2015, 70 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10023882 2019, 158 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20068686 2021, 107 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27061704

Thanks! Macroexpanded:

The X-Y Problem - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34444353 - Jan 2023 (55 comments)

The XY Problem (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27061704 - May 2021 (107 comments)

The XY Problem (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20068686 - June 2019 (158 comments)

Ask HN: What's your favorite technical formulation (i.e., the XY problem)? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17344147 - June 2018 (1 comment)

The XY problem - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13578522 - Feb 2017 (1 comment)

The XY Problem - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10023882 - Aug 2015 (70 comments)

The X-Y Problem - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=52486 - Sept 2007 (1 comment)

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#46
post #21

Mark-Jason Dominus was the root cause of the "XY" name, inadvertently. I, Raymond Chen, Charles Cazabon, and Eric S. Raymond didn't use that name at all. A lot of people foolishly chose to go with "XY", because they thought that what we were saying was silly. I even had bloody foolish people on Stack Exchange complain that I wasn't using the sensible name "XY", when I was one of the people who wrote about this stuff…

[flagged]

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#47
As I recall from prior XYP threads on HN, many comments appear to be XYP baddies brosplaning from an apparent position that other people online are tools that should subserviently respond to their requests, rather than human beings who have their own perspectives and motivations for responding that need to be accommodated when you want them to perform free labor.

Indeed, it's always possible that someone with an XYP shaped question really does actually need the literal thing they are asking. But the expertise of the person being asked says that it 99 out of 100 times they heard a question like that, it was someone who had a deeper level confusion and they've already been burned wasting their time solving the wrong issue many times before. If you deny that their expertise has value why are you asking them?

You know what's worse than someone octuple checking that you're solving the right problem?

Not responding to you at all or abandoning the support channel and not helping anyone at all with related issues anymore. --- which is what happens when people finally get burned out from hearing askers say "Just answer the f*king question!".

Sometimes when you seek support you just have to go through the motions even when you think they don't apply. They might not-- but they help the supporting person achieve confidence that they're not wasting your time and their own time (which ought to be a priority to you, since you're imposing on it! not wasting their time is about the only compensation a person is usually providing in an online Q/A venue), and sometimes they really do help. This also applies to level setting questions ("Is there free disk space?" "Is it plugged in?")-- themselves really a simple XYP (e.g. you think the widget doesn't work, but really you ran out of space and didn't complete the install). Even when your issue isn't XYPed taking a step back to review the basics and explain more of it to someone else can be illuminating.

Don't want to waste a "godawful amount of time" fully explaining? Well think about how the answerer feels answering the XY rutted questions over and over and over again. At least when you get through your task you'll have the reward of a solved problem, often the person helping you doesn't have that much of a payoff on the horizon. Empathy is required in both directions, but in general the greater burden should be on the party initiating the request.

(though even where something like paid support might reverse the burden, the supporters expertise is a good reason to give a lot of slack to the way they want to go about solving the problem.)

An approach that can help is to just anticipate the XY answer and (politely!) explain how your problem isn't the one people might assume and why in your initial question. If you don't know the domain well enough to do that convincingly then you likely don't know if you don't actually have the XYP to begin with. Explaining where you are and how you got there and what you think you've already tried is good-support-requesting 101.

But in any case, the harm to going through the motions and making everyone more satisfied is just part of the cost in soliciting support from strangers.

If the cost is too much for you there is always the option of continuing to work on it on your own. Or maybe try AI: https://nt4tn.net/articles/aixy.html (somewhat outdated, as GPT4 is actually better about correctly warning you about XYP, but at least if you abusively tell it to "just answer the f*king question" you're not harming anyone :) and it doesn't have the freedom to start ignoring you )

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#48
post #24
post #4

We have a phrase to cut through this at work: "WAYRTTD". Someone will post a question and immediately below it, clarify why they think that'll solve their problem. e.g: > How do you assert that a jest mock was called? > WAYRTTD: My test passes, but I'm not sure function X was called and I'm worried it's passing anyway. Helps keep people on the right tracks more often than not.

This took me longer than I’d like to admit to decipher: “What Are You Really Trying To Do”

This feels like an acronym that takes longer to mentally decode than just writing the thing out.

I've never heard of this one (or at least not seen it commonly enough to actually be worth remembering), and at least for me formulating a comment takes much longer than the act of typing it, so I'm not sure what exactly is saved in cases like this.

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#49
"Suppose I'm trying to allow multiple threads access to a Dictionary object."

"You should use a ConcurrentDictionary."

"Okay, but I'm actually asking about ways the compiler could help out with code duplication. I'm not actually trying to protect a Dictionary object."

"A ConcurrentDictionary would fix that."

"What I'm looking for is some way the C# compiler could help adding a wrapper to many functions. The Dictionary object was just an example."

"I've read your problem and you should use a ConcurrentDictionary."

(Screams in XY.)

https://stackoverflow.com/q/52312822/3568

Re: The XY Problem (2014)

#50
post #21

Mark-Jason Dominus was the root cause of the "XY" name, inadvertently. I, Raymond Chen, Charles Cazabon, and Eric S. Raymond didn't use that name at all. A lot of people foolishly chose to go with "XY", because they thought that what we were saying was silly. I even had bloody foolish people on Stack Exchange complain that I wasn't using the sensible name "XY", when I was one of the people who wrote about this stuff…

[flagged]

> Just answer the fricking question or I'll replace you with a bot.

Please do, it'll save everyone a lot of time and headache, especially if this is representative of your usual mode of communication.

Post reply on HN