Hacker News Reader

>1. Trust hasn't been eroded (i.e. fraudsters/salesmen do not predominate)

I have become much more guarded and cynical in the past few years after a handful of interactions like this. At a bar or restaurant, and strike up a conversation with someone, only to have them, 15-30 minutes later, introduce me to their MLM, FX, Trading Mentor, House Flipping, etc. scam, and then swiftly disengage when I am uninterested.

I'm not a good looking dude, nor am I an extrovert. So I now just assume anyone approaching me in public is trying to scam me.

I feel similar, but mostly from leftover baggage from working retail. If someone says something nice to you when you're working a cash register, 9 times out of 10 they want you to do something for them and you're about 10 seconds away from them flipping over to a verbal abuse strategy to get what they want

Makes me even more convinced that I should go out of my way being nice to people working retail it. I do not think I ever get anything "out of it" except feeling a bit more positive in my outlook on life. Then at the local store we have the extremes where people call the cashiers by name, sharing personal stories etc. That makes me feel like I am part of a community, even if it is not a type of relationship I can nourish in the same way..

Maybe I’m paranoid, but I’ve seen too many people get exploited and shit on by people behind their backs while they keep the nicest demeanor face to face. Grown adults at that. Some of these people were well into their 30s.

For me it is usually religion that someone is pushing.

> At a bar or restaurant, and strike up a conversation with someone, only to have them, 15-30 minutes later, introduce me to their MLM, FX, Trading Mentor, House Flipping, etc. scam, and then swiftly disengage when I am uninterested.

Fuck me. I can't even imagine this is a thing in the real world. It sounds like trying to make friends in the YouTube comments section.

Edited to include some more context.

These are great points.

Places where it can be assumed people are comfortable with an approach:

- A public place/destination (bar is okay, bus isn't)

- They are not in the middle of speaking (lulls in conversations are fine)

- They are not blocking sensory inputs (don't approach if you see headphones)

This also isn't magic. My success isn't 100%. It's about 30%

Which means that 7/10 people don't want to talk to me (which is fine).

But it also means that I can pretty reliably make a friend/day if I were so inclined

A bit about me, I'm a short man (5'3") with pretty solid facial symmetry and good grooming but I'm NOT particularly attractive.

I'm putting that context because it is important:

- Because of maleness I'm automatically safer in most situations (as in, I can approach someone, go off solo w/them and be confident I won't be assaulted)

- I'm short, so I'm not REALLY a physical threat to people - Hygiene implies social consideration/health

- Facial symmetry automatically encourages trust

- Being TOO attractive (and I'm nowhere close) can be intimidating to some people

Getting a stranger to have a conversation with you doesn’t mean you made a friend that day, at least not by and definition that’s valuable to me. It’s the first step, but what’s the conversion rate here? Most you probably never speak to again, a small number may reach acquaintance level, and even fewer end up as a friends. We probably have a different idea of what a friend is.

My definition of a friend is defined in another comment response. Basically, "will hang 50%+ of the time an invitation is issued (schedule permitting), and both of us would enjoy ourselves).

Typically takes about 3-5 meets to get there

> You'll find drastically different results in other parts of the world (third-world, for instance). Plenty of people wouldn't talk to you if they see no financial benefit in doing it (even a measly amount can have a profound effect).

I live in Ecuador, so third-world. The people here are not really after money, unless it's very easy to get. I mean, 30% of the "economy" here involves standing in the road with a mango, hoping someone gives you some coin for it (literally). Those same people could go get a real job and do some real hard work if they wanted actual cash. They don't. They like doing basically nothing and getting along okay from it. Not saying you're wrong, but latin america doesn't work this way.

Ecuador has no-cost public healthcare. The US does't. Not having money in the US will literally actively kill you.

I'm not sure this has the effect you are suggesting but it did make me laugh. Makes you wonder who decides what is a first world country and what is a third world country. In some ways the existence of a significant portion of American's (those unfortunate enough to be poor) is worse than a third world existence.

It’s actually quite clear cut.

1st world: NATO and allies 2nd world: The Soviet Sphere 3rd world: Everything else.

Clear cut according to a definition absolutely nobody uses any more. There's no longer a Soviet sphere even if you wanted to use that definition and the post-soviet sphere has diverged dramatically.

> Not having money in the US will literally actively kill you.

Doesn't it put you on Medicaid?

If you're a legal citizen, and in one of the states that opted in to Medicade expansion (many states, all "red" states did not, despite it being literally free money from their prospective.)

A bigger problem is that the limits are quite low (Max income limit will be exceeded by someone making minimum wage in a lot of states. It's only $18k if single, going up to $36k for a family of 4.

That means there's a HUGE donut hole problem of making too much for Medicade, but not nearly enough to actually afford healthcare - or they maybe have some crappy employer plan that has a high deductible that would bankrupt them to even approach.