back

by zug_zug·5mo ago·view on hn ↗
I'd lump this in with so much other inspirational advice (e.g. "Dance like nobody is watching! Love like you've never been hurt!") that is well-intended but hugely impractical.

I think there are finely-tuned social algorithms that we innately follow. For example when meeting somebody we often perform the progressive self-disclosure algorithm in an attempt to find mutual talking points, so maybe yeah you say that you're into drinking IPAs or some other stereotypical thing, that's great.

The reason such a protocol is highly effective is you want to establish somebody's feelings about you before disclosing a huge amount.

7 comments
Yeah, so much of in-person interaction is attempting to suss out the size and orientation of the personal Overton windows of your counterparts so that you can both find the overlap and take a peek through to the other side without sticking your whole head in and having to hear and smell the sights too. Walking around "with the shutters open" can speedrun things a bit, but it isn't practical in many contexts (work, community events, etc) or for people who have a public image. The whole point of smalltalk is to avoid being pulled into public largetalk, not because people are incapable or have no ideas about larger things.
People say things like this but I remember a time when there was a lot more "acceptable" eccentricity. I'm only in my late 40s so it wasn't too long ago.

The article misses the other half of being interesting: being interested. If you're not able to find your counterpart interesting, they'll find you boring.

The proliferation of identities and labels like "neurodivergent" is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

I never got diagnosed as a schizotype in school but they tried really hard to accommodate me anyway. Today I would be misdiagnosed as ADHD or autistic. Today there is a two-class system in school between people who have a diagnosis who can get little accommodations like another two minutes to use the bathroom and people without a diagnosis who have to ride on the back of the bus.

You seem to be describing yourself as a "schizotype" but isn't that also a similar label to the ones you are criticizing the proliferation of?

If you feel that the other labels are unhelpful why do you feel it is helpful to label yourself as a "schizotype"?

Do you think that the people who dance like no one is watching or who love like they’ve never been hurt are on average happier or unhappier than the average person? Are they happier or unhappier than the people who dance like everyone is watching or who love like they’ve always been hurt?
I feel like these are risks with a large penalty if it goes wrong but on average probably higher, no? Dancing more so than love
What is the large penalty for these risks?
I meant in comparison to the reward. Loving recklessly isn't much more deeply and could make you hurt significantly. Dancing confidently isn't rewarded compared to bimeinf embarrassed for dancing badlt.
It seems like you have really strongly held beliefs about these things that are based more in how you’d like the world to be than how it really is.

Even if you think there is a small benefit to dancing confidently compared to dancing insecurely, what specifically is the big relative risk of dancing confidently. What will go wrong?

My wife and I live above a bar frequented by tourists and the bartender is a friend of mine. When it isn’t busy, I’ll usually go down there order a soda and just talk to whoever shows up. The easy opener once the conversation starts is “what keeps you busy?” and keep the conversation going. This lets them talk about work, family, hobbies or whatever else they like to talk about

I read a book that said you should try something new to you at least every quarter if not more often. It gives you something to talk about.

While my wife and I are empty nesters and at point where we travel a lot and we do the digital nomad thing in spurts so we can always talk about travel or more often ask “what’s the most interesting place you’ve been to”/“What’s interesting about where you live” etc, it doesn’t have to be travel.

And just to be clear, it’s always either guys I am striking a conversation with or couples. There is no way for a 50 year old married guy to talk to a woman alone at the bar without coming off like a creep.

On the other hand, I try not to talk about politics or religion. What’s the point?

> I read a book that said you should try something new to you at least every quarter if not more often. It gives you something to talk about.

Any chance you remember the name?

not OP and not sure of the book but if you're interested in material like this, check out Derek Sivers' work - usually revolves around stepping outside your comfort zone, exploring new ideas, etc.

https://sive.rs/n

> There is no way for a 50 year old married guy to talk to a woman alone at the bar without coming off like a creep.

Not true. You have to engage in a way that signals very clearly you don't really give much of a shit about talking to her, and your social status is higher than hers.

For example, if you're having a conversation with your bartender friend and you need a female perspective to settle a disagreement, and you ask for it without fully "engaging" with her, that'll work fine. Once she's been pulled in you will have to keep hooking her into the conversation with interesting tidbits, but eventually most women will just keep talking.

I am not big into going to bars but I'd say post-50 I have no problem talking to women and not being a "creep". Somehow I am really avuncular and rarely perceived a sexual threat. When I was younger I had more of that problem and was intimidated by beautiful people, a month ago I shook hands with a former Miss America.

Attraction does sometimes come up with women who are 10 years younger than me but otherwise I think it is a non-issue.

I am not either for the most part by myself. It just so happens that I live in a vacation area where my wife and I are the only permanent residence of a condotel (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/condotel.asp). I go down to hang out with the bartender. It’s mostly guys and couples getting away from their kids after spending all day at the parks (Orlando).

The bar is literally downstairs from where we live.

My wife and I also usually sit at the bar when we go somewhere and just talk to people whenever we go out.

> signals very clearly you don't really give much of a shit about talking to her, and your social status is higher than hers

he said "_without_ coming off like a creep"

Maybe if you do it very very wrong. I suppose you're imagining some swaggering jerk putting her down and acting self important, that's your mistake.
No, it's very much yours and the way you phrased it. Perhaps you didn't mean it this way, but you sound like some kind of "pickup artist" type giving advice on "negging" women.
Since I didn't mention how to do anything, seems like he was projecting his biases on my words. Pretty sad that "be someone worth talking to" and "don't project neediness" are somehow owned by the manosphere now. No wonder people are marrying chatbots.
> "be someone worth talking to" and "don't project neediness"

Doesn't come off like a creep.

> signals very clearly you don't really give much of a shit about talking to her, and your social status is higher than hers

Comes off like a creep.

One that cannot tell the difference probably comes off like a creep.

Not to mention that humans seem to have a fixed (yet variable, compared to the entire population) amount of energy they're each able to spend. Sometimes very interesting people gatekeep their authenticity to protect and preserve what they have to offer others, especially to strangers, coworkers, clients, even family.

I think the general message of bravery in authenticity is very important on a personal level, and incredibly subjective with regards to anybody external.

When a vampire knocks on your door, do you always invite them in?

> I think there are finely-tuned social algorithms that we innately follow.

That would explain why I can’t do small talk, those are not innate to everyone.

Wasn’t to me either. It’s a learned skill that you can study and practice. I am only child. About a decade ago I saw one of two ways to make above my 2nd tier city enterprise dev wages - about $150K - either “grind leetCode and work for a FAANG” (r/cscareerquestions) or go into customer facing consulting where I would be required to do the business dinners and small talk.

I chose the latter. At 45+, there is no age discrimination in consulting - I still do hands on keyboard coding + cloud. Even before I got into consulting (working full time for consulting companies), I had roles inside companies where I interviewed with new to company directors/CTOs who were looking for someone who could get things done not reversing a b tree on the whiteboard. I had to learn how to talk. I haven’t had a coding interview since 2012 and I’ve worked for 6 companies since then

When you put it that way; I guess after some reflection, I realize my algorithm is optimized for efficiency and I immediately try to hone in on strong agreements or disagreements in taste/politics/etc. so that I don't waste my time getting to know a shitty person, or miss out on a potential best friend.

These means engaging in a level of provocative speech/behavior that sometimes makes people uncomfortable (not my problem of course; I have little interest in euphemism or politeness, my energy goes toward transparency and kindness)

Progressive self-disclosure can have its uses but if I can't break the ice in two minutes with a stranger, it's not a good sign for our compatibility.

Now, I did grow up in an environment where I was never really allowed to exist. I am an atheist raised by an hyper-abusive, hyper-religious, ex-boxer Catholic deacon in an extremely conservative part of the United States. The police were at my house every couple of weeks. So this may have influenced my comfort with radical transparency; I had to learn at a young age to literally fight constantly for my right to think my own way, and I'm ready to do that at any time.

But I have definitely been in some neighborhoods where the most interaction you should have with a stranger is a nod of the head, anything more is asking for trouble no matter who you are. I can vouch that there are harsh urban environments which prevent, by design, even progressive disclosure from being a safe option. This effectively kills any chance at real unity in the community, and drives up crime statistics, further justifying the continued disunification tactics.

It would be cool to catalog, categorize and analyze these kinds of social algorithms. It seems like an interesting cross-disciplinary field, involving psychology, sociology, game theory, cultural anthropology, etc.

If I meet somebody that immediately skips the progressive self-disclosure small talk and jumps right in to a big discussion… I’m going to withdraw. Even if I agree with everything you’re saying, it comes off as aggressive. like youre trying to speed run forming a relationship by skipping the small talk
No, I'm just not going to progressively disclose my nature. I'm just going to be myself, regardless of how others in my environment might react.

I can field the small talk, several of my friends have commented on my ability to break the ice quickly with strangers. But after a minute or two, the conversation is either over or we're moving onto more interesting discussions.

Come to one of the conservative towns I grew up in and you'll understand the need for such a mentality. Progressive disclosure can lead to things like accepting racism, sexism and other injustices.

It's a good mentality to carry forth into other environments as well, because at the end of the day, the less masks I have to carry, the better.

You don't sound like someone I'd like to speak with even if we might agree on things. You writing has a very aggressive tone to it for no reason.

I'll be honest if someone tries to get into politics and other such things very soon after I start speaking to them it really puts me off. I might not disengage right away, but I'll probably never choose to speak with them again.

I think both of you are projecting an aggression tone onto my words. Poe's law, maybe.

It shouldn't offend you that I don't personally enjoy continued small talk and prefer to form deeper connections at the risk of losing superficial connections, by not engaging in drawn-out progressive disclosure.

You're making assumptions about our compatibility without knowing much about me at all. But, this was my point: Now I know that we don't need to continue the discussion and we can both spend our energy elsewhere.

As a neutral 3rd-party who wants to help you speed-run your self-growth (because I like your energy):

- Yeah you come across as aggro. That's okay, sounds like you went through some stuff.

- Sounds like you've identified you grew up in a weird situation. That sounds bad, sucks you had to go through that.

- But it also sounds like there's a piece of you that's trying to overcorrect. I understand, it's common among us nerds -- you grow up in a situation where you aren't as appreciated as you should be and you try to turn off that feeling entirely somehow. Unfortunately these types of attempts to hack our own feelings are usually worse than the problems in the first place. Usually the best course is to slowly try to remind yourself (over years) "That was a bad situation, it was bad luck, it meant nothing, and it's not the norm. I don't need to fundamentally change to not have that happen again."

I do appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts. I still believe that you and the two other commenters here are misreading or misinterpreting me.

That's a lesson for me to choose my words more carefully, but only to avoid misinterpretation in an online forum; everything I said, I 100% stand by, and it's honestly unsurprising that a comment about being provocative and to-the-point, not always progressively self-disclosing, has made some people uncomfortable.

> Unfortunately these types of attempts to hack our own feelings are usually worse than the problems in the first place

I want to stress that I mean this in the most constructive, positive way possible, but it feels like your comment projects a bit onto me in an attempt to find common ground. I welcome the attempt but I do want to point out that I don't try to "hack my feelings", and I don't organize my life and behaviors under some fear that my childhood is somehow going to happen again. I am very in touch with my feelings, I value emotional intelligence and reflection. I don't pathologically worry about others appreciating me.

I brought up my past to show how such a perspective might form, but the perspective is not some kind of defense mechanism. It is a playbook for how to live my life in a way that aligns with my ideals and goals, and it's one of the only good things to have come out of my childhood. I cherish my perspective and how it's allowed me to help both myself and others.