Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | eqreqeq's comments login

>> The other solution is to be really, really nice. To be incredibly accommodating. To engender a spirit of goodwill, joviality and kindness such that the flunky wants to help you.

That is not a practical solution. It sounds almost like a bribe. I'm not saying that you should be rude to anybody, but you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs. Is a slippery slope. Now you are kissing their asses, latter that will not be enough and the demands for bribes will be the next logical step. No, the line has to be drawn here.

Politeness is fine, more than that and you are kissing their asses.

-----


So I was pulled over while driving a few months ago.

I was trying to keep up with a friend, I got behind and I made a really stupid, illegal and probably dangerous maneuver in trying to keep up. Happened to be a cop at that intersection who pulled me over.

Officer comes to the car, and asks about what I just did. I pretty much immediately admit to doing it, and tell him that it was a terrible lapse of judgement on my part. He takes me license/reg back and runs it, then comes back and just asks me how long I've been driving. I told him about 5 hours or so, and he says he meant how many years. I tell him 15 or so.

He comments that he can't find any tickets or things on my record, and I tell him I've never had one. He just tells me to not do it again and to move on. I apologized again and told him I appreciated him keeping an eye out for the public safety.

Now I know that you're supposed to be super defensive, and next to an asshole to the cop in citing all your rights and admitting to nothing. But really, I messed up. It was better for me to admit what I did and accept responsibility.

So... this might be the kissing up that the prior post is talking about. Did I technically 'have' to do it? No. But I'm pretty sure if I had done otherwise, I would have left with a ticket.

-----


Maybe, but it's also just as likely to have resulted in a ticket after confessing.

-----


So? If you _know_ you've done something wrong, and you get caught, then you should own up and accept the consequences.

My experience is people have more respect for people who will admit to a mistake/wrong-doing than for someone who will try to weasel their way out of trouble.

-----


Not sure why you're getting downvoted, because you're absolutely right. In fact, the parent's anecdote is just that: an anecdote. The reality of the matter however is that you should never, ever admit wrong-doing under any circumstances. Use the minimum amount of words for basic communication with the cop, be polite, and then deal with whatever ticket is written (either pay it or contest it in court).

-----


Jeez... what do we teach kids these days?

If you've done wrong, admit it. Don't lie about it.

If you get a ticket, accept it as deserving punishment for putting other lives at risk.

-----


Particularly in the US, talking to the police is a bad idea. There's a famous video about it.

-----


I've seen the video, and know that overall its good advice.

I think though, depending on various factors, that playing 'nice' can definitely get you further than stonewalling the cop. It all depends what you (potentially) did, who you are (being a white, upper middle class male doesn't hurt), and what you think the worse-case scenario will be.

-----


I once had a CHP officer tell me in so many words that if I hadn't admitted to speeding, he would have written me a ticket.

Stonewalling isn't necessarily the best strategy, particularly if you both know you were in violation.

-----


This is quite likely to depend on the colour of your skin...

-----


I definitely considered this. I was driving through the border of a traditionally black neighborhood and college campus. I'm a white male, and it was some frat party weekend on the campus and I got the sense he was looking to nail drunk students.

If I wasn't white, I think its highly possible things would have turned out differently.

Every encounter I've had with police so far (a few traffic stops, being caught dumpster diving, being in a few parks in Boston after midnight), I've found it just to be better to be nice. I've walked away from every situation so far with zero tickets, arrests, handcuffings, etc...

-----


If you did something wrong, and know it, I think it's laudable to own up to it and be nice about it. If you get a free pass, great, if not, well, you deserve it.

The OP was trying to do something right, and got punished for it.

-----


Know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em. Sometimes pragmatism beats principle.

-----


>you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs.

You don't. The person in this story did her job. He wouldn't sign the papers so she seized the boat. She also doesn't have the authority to change the papers. Her job is, if something goes sideways, impound everything and let the other parties sort it out.

The author of the article wanted a small and very reasonable exception made for his case. Everyone would agree that the change from CAD to USD is small and inconsequential and in this case more accurate. But that's not how "the system" works, and so he's not asking them to do their job.

If you just want the public official you're dealing with to do their job, then all you have to do is refrain from being difficult. If you want small special favors, then be nice. It's that easy.

-----


Yours is a minority viewpoint here, and I wish it got more explanation.

If the bureaucrat's only two options were a) let the guy have the boat, or b) take the boat so someone else can sort it out, then I'm definitely more sympathetic to the bureaucrat here.

Is that understanding correct?

-----


From the point of view of the border, the item has already been released from Canada. They almost certainly can't just dump it back on the other side (they would have to refuse it entry to the US). They also can't give it to him w/o the proper paperwork (bureaucracy aside, that paperwork insures that the proper fees and taxes are administered). If he won't sign, the only thing they can do is hold the property. Eventually, they'll bill the owner for the cost of holding it or sell it at auction.

I don't know the code at all, but logic suggests this is the most likely scenario.

-----


He is not explaining how things ought to be, he is explaining how things are. I think you guys agree.

-----


While we're on the topic of explaining how things are... I don't think anyone's too surprised that Michael Arrington failed a congeniality test.

-----


> That is not a practical solution. It sounds almost like a bribe.

I would say that, for better or worse (worse, obviously), it is both.

-----


but you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs

This is what I thought when I saw the US custom of tipping bartenders.

-----


>>In France, the verb 'work' is travailler. Traditionally this meant literally to toil, a chore, an obligation.

"travailler" comes from Latin, in spanish the same word is "trabajar", notice the resemblance. It literally means "to work" in english. Just saying this because I don't really buy it that "travailler" in French means "to toil".

-----


Travail (like trabajo) means labor, effort. It's different from "empoi" ("empleo" in español), which has a bigger relation with being useful, and is also less commonly used.

-----


>>Alas, America isn’t what it used to be: Insulting the French doesn’t seem to be rewarded by the stock market, and Titan is down about 1% so far today.

As if. Correlation is not causation.

-----


True. Also, the wsj article is dated today. Look at the market, EVERYTHING is down today. The letter was dated Feb 8. As if this news is just getting around to the big players today...

-----


This isn't even correlation, since when did insulting the french correlate to a rise/fall in stock prices?

-----


I know this may not be appropriate but wow is she cute [1] and hot [2] at the same time. And on top of that she is brilliant, regardless of how her gig with Yahoo! turns out. Which makes her even more attractive.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marissa_Mayer.jpg

[2] http://www.glamour.com/images/women-of-the-year/1103-marissa...

-----


Calling someone in their 30-s that you are not into intimate relationship with or hitting on them cute is indeed inappropriate.

Also her looks are irrelevant - they won't help her save the company and many of yahoo shareholders will gladly kiss Medusa if she able to increase the share price 3 fold.

I am much more worried that there is not much of her brilliance shown yet. The new yahoo homepage, while improvement doesn't seem to be able to get new demographics or fix the major problems that made me abandon yahoo years ago.

-----


It's probably good for PR to have an attractive woman in an important position, especially in a tech company.

The press like publishing pictures of attractive people.

I'd wager more people have heard of Mayer than sergey brin for example.

-----


may not be appropriate???

-----


Is the same thing as people trying to buy a Ferrari. Demand vastly exceeds supply so they will have no problem finding people that will think nothing of spending that amount of money. And frankly speaking $1,500 is not a lot of money. If you are poor or stingy I guess it is but at this point in time they are not targeting cheapskates.

-----


I was with you until you mentioned poor/cheapskate. How's life in that bubble of yours?

-----


Broke and programming everyday on a project I'm working on. And with no income for quite some time. I'm down to two sets of pants and some of my clothes have holes. My sneakers certainly have plenty of holes. My office is the local library. Life is great!

-----


Let us know how it turns out!

-----


speak for yourself buddy....$1500 is still a big slice of pie to some of us

-----


> …Is the same thing as people trying to buy a Ferrari. Demand vastly exceeds supply

I think the normal idea under these circumstances is to increase the price until the demand meets the supply.

-----


So they increased it from $0 to $1500. Sounds reasonable.

-----


So, comrade, it costs $0 to produce a Google Glass?

-----


Probably not but developing it wasn't free.

-----


I'm starting to think what we really need around here is an English proficiency test.

-----


My bad, only skimmed the comment.

-----


Are you implying that they should have priced it higher? I mean, if we're going to go by "what we paid to produce it" rather than "what people previously paid for it", it should probably start at $10k.

-----


I'm not sure what conversation you're having with yourself. I'm just pointing out that the time-honored capitalist response to demand outstripping supply is raising prices rather than having contests.

-----


Many people who make millions or billions still pause at paying more than $1 for a cup of coffee.

You don't become a billionaire by wasting your money.

-----


While there's some truth to that, you also don't achieve success by being penny wise and pound foolish, which that kind of thinking often leads to.

-----


correlation is not causation.

-----


...not necessarily causation.

-----


>>6) Voyeurist's refuge: Pay someone with social skills far more developed than yours, have him go out and pick up a woman while you sit back in our couch and watch the spectacle unfold. Not sure how many would consent to a partner wearing glasses while having sex, though.

pornstars

-----


I'm guessing a lot of guys would be delighted about hiring a female pornstar to try and seduce a woman they have a thing for.

-----


Maybe. I've been using a Tom-Tom lately and what I've notice is that it sort of turns you into a mindless drone. At least that is how I felt. I can certainly see a thing like Google Glass adversely affecting people by making them too dependent on it. How exactly? I'm not sure.

-----


>>glass worship stones

I believe we are in the midst of a new religion being born!

-----


>>t is also possible that his IQ raised significantly as he got older due to extensive study as it is also possible that his IQ test was simply poorly administered for whatever reason.

Which is why an IQ is useless. If it can rise then it is not really measuring intelligence. Rather it is measuring what you know so far. Which explains why kids from better income families have better IQs.

And yet people treat IQ as a constant. Glad I decided never to let a single number define me. To all you that believe the IQ is important I say ...

-----


I'm not an IQ expert by any stretch but I doubt that it fluctuates that much (in the population in general). Based on the limited reading I have done your IQ will tend to rise as you get older, however in general people will stay in roughly the same position relative to others.

Whilst you can probably influence your IQ by working your brain really hard every day or lower it by doing a lot of drugs I doubt it is really that meaningless as it does tend to correlate well with success.

However I'd be curious to know how it correlates with lifetime income once you control for family income. I assume this has been researched.

-----


Since we are making anecdotal observations I'll posit that you could significantly increase your IQ if you focused on it. Just like if you wanted to play an instrument. You can increase your playing ability by focusing on it, or more specifically, by practicing. That is how I see IQ, as something that you can get better at by practicing, nothing more, nothing less.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: