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

611–620 of 632 posts

Re: STFU

#611

Post by filoleg »

rootusrootus wrote: post #326
filoleg wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bat…

I assumed they meant jerking off in a stall. Something I don’t want to know about but definitely happens.

If that's the case, then sure, that perspective is way more understandable.

I didn't take it that way, because "in public", to me, implies that other people are fully exposed to it. I don't consider "in a private stall" as public, just like I don't consider "taking your underwear off in a bathroom stall" (very normal) as "taking your underwear off in public".

Re: STFU

#612

Post by jama211 »

magicmicah85 wrote: post #314
jama211 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think it through just a tiny bit more. It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way. Therefore it’s less likely the other individual will confront you back, or perhaps more importantly it would make them look more unreasonable for doing so. Social pressure is a real thing and it affects both b…

The people who react angrily to someone asking them to keep their noise down are very likely the same people who react angrily to someone interrupting their call or entertainment with loud noises, especially noises that just repeat what they're saying or watching. I agree social pressure is a real thing, but if you don't have the courage to ask them to kindly keep the volume down, how would you have the courage to do…

These questions have pretty straightforward answers. No, the first one isn’t a reasonable assumption because people react VERY differently to passive vs direct action. This isn’t controversial. As for your second one, easy, because one takes less “courage” than the other.

I also disagree with the entire premise that it’s about courage in the first place. You can have the courage but decide the other method simply has less downsides. No need to pretend otherwise.

Re: STFU

#613

Post by jama211 »

tshaddox wrote: post #16
jama211 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think it through just a tiny bit more. It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way. Therefore it’s less likely the other individual will confront you back, or perhaps more importantly it would make them look more unreasonable for doing so. Social pressure is a real thing and it affects both b…

> It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way. I actually agree with this. And similarly, I'd argue that it's more socially acceptable to use this audio repeater than to "nicely" confront someone who is so brazenly violating social norms.

Exactly!

Re: STFU

#614

Post by sneak »

mancerayder wrote: post #579
SoftTalker wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as I'm within the restrictions of any ordinance regarding noise level/place/time of day, I have no obligation to be silent in public places. You don't have a right to freedom from annoyances, within reason.

That's why the person wrote the app in the link of this thread. So that when you annoy us, we'll echo it back in your face at full volume. And you have no right to complain since you just approved not being free from us doing this to you.

Intent matters.

Re: STFU

#615

Post by onethought »

xp84 wrote: post #468
onethought wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the only meaningful point being made in this thread. The sound from a phone speaker is annoying, more so, than a typical in person talking. To me the solution lies somewhere in fixing that to make it sound more natural. Everyone else claiming that some how having “loud” conversation is rude, feels like they’ve fallen into some anti-social hole… we are literally the only animal to have developed comple…

No, the loudness is a whole separate dimension. 99% of the time, there's no need to be loud in public. Not when you're talking on the phone (the microphones on a phone work great!), not when you're having a conversation with one or two other people close to you. Not when talking to Siri (etc). You can talk quietly in a place that isn't very loud, and in a place like an airport you can talk just loud enough to be clea…

Right so it’s not phones at all. We are really saying: turn it down - right?

Re: STFU

#616

Post by hackable_sand »

bobbylarrybobby wrote: post #473
tkel wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, I read about someone being murdered by their spouse. That doesn't mean it is going to happen to me. The media reports on sensational stories. That doesn't make them normal.

You tend to know your spouse, you don't know the mental state of people on the train. Especially people who have already demonstrated they don't care about social norms or preserving tranquility in public spaces.

How do any of you actually function in society?

Public music should be celebrated. This is someone sharing a cultural touchstone and y'all just want to be antisocial robots.

Re: STFU

#617

Post by hackable_sand »

tombert wrote: post #530
fernandotakai wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i've seen people get beat up because they asked an anti-social c-words to turn the volume down. some people just cannot be reasoned and the amount of people like this is growing HARD.

I’ve never really understood that. I’ve never been beat up over it but people have gotten extremely defensive over it. Is it some kind of minor evangelism on their end? Like they think the music is so wonderful that obviously everyone should be listening to it?

It's really not that big of a deal

Re: STFU

#618

Post by pc86 »

johnisgood wrote: post #470
pc86 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3) "I don't like this" / "I don't wanna" is not really an acceptable reason to be an antisocial ass.

Being in nature, all alone is not social though, is it? Why are people so frustrated? What am I missing? FWIW, it is dangerous to wear headphones in the city and listen to music, but you can always wear only one side. It is not comfortable, but that is how you remain safe without being an ass.

It is the imposition onto other people that makes it antisocial. The "I don't care or won't consider how this impacts other people, I am going to do whatever I want or whatever is easiest for me. If it bothers, upsets, or imposes on others, I don't care."

To keep with the example below, walking in the woods alone is "not social" but it's not at all "anti-social." Listening to music with headphones while walking through the woods is not anti-social. Blasting music on a portable speaker, not caring whether or not you're disturbing other people on that trail, is a pretty great example of anti-social behavior. As is having a speaker phone conversation on mass transit, or being visibly under the influence of drugs in public, or choosing to park illegally and block someone in because you'll "just be a minute" or any number of other things people do because it makes their lives 5% easier at the risk of making someone else's 10% harder.

Re: STFU

#619

Post by c22 »

toast0 wrote: post #513
johnisgood wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being in nature, all alone is not social though, is it? Why are people so frustrated? What am I missing? FWIW, it is dangerous to wear headphones in the city and listen to music, but you can always wear only one side. It is not comfortable, but that is how you remain safe without being an ass.

> Being in nature, all alone is not social though, is it? Why are people so frustrated? What am I missing? Let's say I'm out in the woods, being non social. And someone comes up the path, playing music loudly. Now I'm being annoyed by people again, which is what I was trying to avoid by being out in the woods. And they're usually on a motorized vehicle, even though motorized vehicles are prohibited on the path. I'm n…

If I'm out in the woods being non social I don't want to see you at all, it doesn't matter what you're doing. That's why I get off the path, the path is a social construct.

Re: STFU

#620

Post by c22 »

kelnos wrote: post #519
pvtmert wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there are many sibling/child comments here touching the bluetooth speaker topic. obviously there are numerous people blasting those in public places in waay too high volume. sometimes when I ride bicycle in non-car road (cycle/hiking paths around luxembourg) i put not-too-loud music playing on phone speaker (about 70% volume) both for vibes and also for safety. -- as there are people walking which may be obstructed b…

The way I look at it when it comes to the comfort bits: if you aren't comfortable using headphones to listen to your music in a public place (for fit or safety or whatever reasons), then you don't get to listen to your music. It's just basic common courtesy. I find it mind-blowing that there are so many comments in this subthread supporting this sort of behavior. I guarantee you that your 70% volume music while cycli…

If you're not comfortable tolerating a wide range of sometimes abrasive behaviors from the hugely-divergent set of people you might encounter in public then you don't get to go out in public. Hopefully you make enough money you can afford to insulate yourself from others.

I find it mind-blowing that so many commenters in this thread forgot the 2nd half of the golden rule: Be conservative in your outputs and liberal with your inputs.

Post reply on HN