Not only that, but he is also implying that people "who design processors" must also know our way around shopping for computers. This couldn't be farther from the truth.
So this story does not come off as an example of "I don't mind being seen as stupid", it comes off as a very strong example of "I'm holier than you"-attitude which is the entire opposite than the article author's is trying to make.
Exactly my thoughts.
Even the way the story is told to the reader with: "which I had a good reason to want at the time", has the same sentiment towards us.
"My reasoning is even above explaining to you, my reader."
Extrapolating from this article, this individual is likely a nightmare to work with due to their closed nature and unwillingness to share thoughts or decision making points.
> I try to be careful to avoid this failure mode when onboarding interns and junior folks and have generally been sucessful, but it's taken me up to six weeks to convince people that it's ok for them to ask questions
I kind of get the impression that asking the author questions is actually a very painful process.
The question is really what kind of person do you want to be? Do you want a person who habitually lies about unimportant stuff in order to accomplish goals? Do you want to be a person who is genuine but gets unfairly judged by strangers? Or do you want to be a person who justifies themselves to strangers in order to avoid getting judged?
If you think lying is wrong and seeking the approval of strangers is a bad habit only one option remains.
I guess the reality is that huge majority of customers in those shops aren't proficient at technology at all,
so it's incredibly good bet that customer has no idea what s/he's doing.
Part of the job of someone working in a customer-facing, sales job is to understand what the customer wants. A sales associate at an Apple Store probably has dozens of interactions every day where they're able to help people understand the products better and enable them to make a more informed decision. That is their job.
Saying "I just want the one that's in the smallest box" makes you look like a customer that's in need of guidance and help, and someone who's probably going to have a bad experience with the product if they don't get it.
Getting irritated by a response that is trying to help just shows a lack of empathy. People are not robots and there is a really good reason that the "white lie" is a thing.
People are shallow and often don't spend a lot of time trying to understand other people.
You won't always have the luxury to explain yourself.
Probably not.
And was the encounter really antagonistic? Dan Luu is the one who left looking stupid.
Dan was asking the employee to expend considerable additional effort to find the smallest laptop box when he potentially knew the model number, or least had a reason that would justify the extra work. I would have just said "I'm really tight on carry-on space", not to avoid looking stupid, but to assure the employee I wasn't breaking their balls for no reason.
He touches on this later in the article after comparing thoughts to another person (who is block quoted) who seems to wonder the same things as a lot of commenters here...
The point is that this is a two way transaction with a real person, who has their own hidden state, goals and limits that are not always apparent to a consumer.
E.g. company policy on deducing what the customer really needs.
How was the employee to know Dan was the one person who actually knew what they needed, out of 100 over confident buffoon's that came to the shop that week.
This is why I don't hassle the support person fixing my internet when they run through support script.
I don't say "skip this, I have an honours degree blah blah", cause they have enough constraints to deal with as is... And once in a 100 times, I will learn something I didn't know...
Anyways, if you tell a store person "oh, I'm getting this for my husband" when it's a gift for yourself, that's more honesty than dishonesty, because to the store person, "clarity" with a customer is very goal oriented. Dan Luu wasn't trying to screw with the store person, and in the end they all got what they wanted, even if Dan Luu walked away "looking stupid".
That he doesn't care if he looks stupid is besides the point here. He looked stupid to the retail worker not because he didn't explain his underlying reasons for wanting a small box. He looked stupid because he didn't understand the retail sales process. That is to say, he was stupid, about that one thing, and that is why he looked stupid.