dmesg

Joined 1 year ago

Karma

Submissions

Member since

Apr 26

Recent submissions

I edited and rephrased a lot of my posts and the other replies and maybe my though process is clearer now. I didn't word it all too well, forgive me for not being a native, I struggled to bring my point across in an enunciated way.

Comment · 1 year ago

> I think there's a good question about whether people can tell you're anxious at a glance

Which is why I linked the nature article? It's plain obvious an interesting point I tried to make that "normal" people will instantly perceive someone as likeable or unlikeable. Which the article in the OP goes great lengths to discuss.

I mean I can live with people immediately going against my point, I just see they didn't even gave it 5 minutes of thought. Which is not necessarily directed at you, I cannot possibly convince anyone and reply to anyone at the same time.

Comment · 1 year ago

The article describes how neurotypical people, i.e. the average Joe would come up with a decision to like or not like a person based on first impressions before the person being judged even talks. Fairly sure in an article about how people are thinking how they are perceived by others this is relevant. But I get it can upset people that it is out of their control entirely.

Comment · 1 year ago

Curious, yet the most people suffering from anxiety as secondary comorbid psychiatric condition are the depressed, autistic and ADHD sufferers.

The article is definitely a mental health topic. A little harmless stage fright before a presentation is not real clinical generalized anxiety and affects most normal people.

Comment · 1 year ago

Quote:

> Why else would someone be so anxious about how others see them?

The scientific consensus would tell the author that judgement in humans happens already the moment they see a person and it is immediate, even if the person not doing anything:

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep40700

>across three studies, we find that first impressions [...] made from thin slices of real-world social behavior by typically-developing observers are not only far less favorable across a range of trait judgments compared to controls

Edit:

Okay this was completely misunderstood. My point was that the "normal" people in the study immediately internally know if to like or not like a person. Hence why first impressions DO matter the most. Which is why I simply disagree with the argument in the OP that anyone has control over their perception.

You also cannot win people over if the most respected person in a group dislikes you. The others will follow boot.

Comment · 1 year ago

The (very weak) Caesar cipher was used in ancient Rome though and cryptography in general way before. It could be a silent nod to how far our achievements have gone and that encryption is a basic human desire since millennia.

Comment · 1 year ago

Caesar cipher anyone? Romans knew (bad) cryptography.

Comment · 1 year ago

No surprise! I assume the average HN poster possesses more ethics than a tech bro. If you ever submit a post about your hobby I'd probably enjoy reading it. Love seeing people building their own 433 MHz antennas and adding stereoscopic cameras do drones. Is LIDAR a valid solution?

Comment · 1 year ago

"There is no spoon", or if you prefer the post-modern Baudrillard'ian take:

"The territory no longer precedes the map, nor survives it. Henceforth, it is the map that precedes the territory - precession of simulacra."

There never was a crane, the maps didn't show one.

Comment · 1 year ago

This, especially since I don't want to come off with tech bro vibes by asking "Would you like $thing?":

[YES!!!] / [Remind me later™]

Comment · 1 year ago

Hey thanks for noticing and replying! I approve of your point to curate the members, this is exactly what a friend told me after linking him your post. Fittingly he posted an image of Machiavelli under his reply and I told him I don't see it in such a controlling way.

Thinking more about it, you see this both in forums and IRL: https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths (Minus the trolling aspect as in groups there is no anonymity as in a forum.)

Often rich people associate only with people of equal wealth in cigar lounges or country and golf clubs. It's to be expected many hidden filters apply to online and messaging culture as well. Your C.S. Lewis quote and idea of how this applies even to HN is very positive. Indeed I only could reply because I saw your article at the right time in my feed and happened to be online and browsing entries.

In the past I liked to read a lot of Scott Alexander Siskind, SSC/ACX and LessWrong, even if often disagreeing with some points. Don't be afraid to be wrong when blogging. It is an iterative process and to be honest, I would like a blogger who does a review of his old posts after a year and write where their opinions changed. Not in full, but selecting a few opinions that got refined over time. And don't fear your audience being small. Often I vote up content because it is different or prompted me to self-reflect.

Comment · 1 year ago

That was a good read and it resonated with me from personal experience. Often the groups I was in were fragmented or I'd be suddenly invited into a second group with someone else removed. Glad it wasn't me, would have been too hard on me to realize I'm suddenly alone in a ghost group.

I wonder what the cut-offs are for "group is too small" and "group is too large", but that certainly depends on the subject the group is about. A philosophy book reading group probably doesn't work well with the bestselling crime novel audience.

Comment · 1 year ago

Thanks for getting ahead of me. I add their competitor MS doing the same even more openly:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/microsoft-swiftkey...

Always assume companies will gather, use and share your data in all ways they legally can. The burden of proof is never on the user that companies don't milk us. Calling it "misinformation" as someone further above did is bizarre. This is the default business model of big tech.