Hacker News Reader

Comment by purpleblue | Hacker News Reader

I understand the point of this blog post but it's also kind of BS.

For example, the last one about how to handle unexpected situations. Some people have a tendency to panic or have high anxiety over the unknown. That doesn't mean they aren't of high character or you shouldn't do business with them. They could have built their entire lives to anticipate these types of situations and have other coping mechanisms to help deal with it. In a work environment, they could easily have those things in place.

To just spring something on someone without any context or knowing the person feels like a really, really poor "test" of anything.

View on HN

Author said the test was for a senior executive who by definition is meant to be a leader. A leader is meant to be someone who can navigate others through the unknown. If you can't navigate the unknown by yourself, then you're a follower and not a leader. The higher up the totem pole you go, the more unknowns you have to be able to deal with as you get further away from being a specialist and more towards a generalist. You literally can't learn everything so you've got to be ok stepping out of your comfort zone and having faith in your abilities and principles to be able to make it through whatever obstacle is in your way.

There is absolutely no judgement in those sentences, as a species we need people with all kinds of different skillsets, and that includes both followers and leaders. And just because someone can't handle the unknown at a certain point in their life doesn't mean they can't evolve to be someone who can. In fact, we all play both roles constantly throughout our entire lives. The CEO is a leader in his company but when he's taking golf lessons he's a follower to the professional golf instructor.

I agree. Context is everything. A "test" in a work environment is one thing, but at a restaurant? My priorities are totally different at a restaurant. I just want to eat and have a good time. I don't need to be in control. That's not why I'm at a restaurant.

At a restaurant, short of something truly egregious like hair in my food or raw meat, I have tremendous patience for wait staff. Mistakes happen. Kitchens can be hectic, orders get mis-entered. Maybe I wasn't clear about what I wanted. But at the end of the day, what I'm eating is far less of a priority than the fact that I'm eating with someone.

But if they bring a dish that wasn't what I ordered, I might just shrug and accept it. Who cares if it's a burger instead salmon and veg? It's not the end of the world for me.

Does that make me a pushover? I don't think so. It just means I don't prioritize restaurant food over other things, like ensuring the table has a good time and is socializing.

Likewise, if someone interrupted us at the table to say hi, I'd generally understand. Maybe it's rude, but we're in public and it's a social situation, and the world doesn't end if someone interrupts to say hi to the person I'm eating with.

But when I'm in the workplace, in context, then I am much firmer. You don't get to interrupt my meetings. You don't get to deliver the wrong project. I don't get to yell at anyone or treat anyone with disrespect, but I also don't need to tolerate disruption and chaos.

If I notice a mixup as soon as the server brings it, I would absolutely say something because it is probably someone else's meal, and if I accept it that will delay them getting their food. If the server walks away before I notice, then it is too late as they can't serve it to anyone else anyway, so c'est la vie.

Yeah, I might say something to the effect of "I thought I ordered the salmon," and if they say "Oh no, I thought it was the burger," then I'll just shrug and be happy with the burger.

But I'm not going to berate the waiter. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes. I am autistic, for example, and situations that are unpredictable are (guesstimate) about 5-10x more stressful for me than for the average person. Most of my "unavoidable" "weak points" are centered around those things and the extreme stress that can come from them.

It doesn't make me a bad person, just different, and more limited in some ways. My brain may be autistic, but my soul isn't.

But it does make you better qualified for some jobs than others.

That is true. I am a very good applied researcher, particularly in the area of machine learning/"AI". It's similar to a "glass cannon" build for certain video game characters. I'm uniquely talented in that the class of people like me can only do some things that people like me do, but the range of conditions that I succeed in is much much narrower.

I had a really hard time near the end of my last job, for example, as the startup changed from research to deploying the built up backlog of research, and I could not pivot to work with a software team. I did my best, but because of how paralyzing thrash is to me, with many tasks in an already unstable environment changing 3-4 times in flight (not outrageously, it was the pace of the project), I was too overwhelmed to work well, and we didn't have enough ML work left that was suited for me to work on.

Thankfully I learned that I was autistic during the year-long or so sabbatical I've taken afterwards to just clean things up a bit. Now I know, I can get accomodations and choose my jobs accordingly. Thankfully I'm good enough to be able to fit into those very specialist jobs, which is a plus.

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate your thoughts and think it was a good one. Thank you for making me think. :) <3

Also, congrats :confetti: on your fifteenth anniversary of joining hackernews. I first only started browsing around 2011-2012, the fact you are still active is amazing. Best of luck to you and yours in your future. :)

thanks!

Hard disagree. Pressure shows us as we are, not as we wish to be.

The fact that it is often more ugly than we wish, does not change it.

Also does not negate the fact that prep work is worthwhile to form habits and counteract the base reactions.

Source: been through the pressure cooker with some things myself & have seen close friends & family go through it.

Hard disagree.

Someone who is starving and steals food (under pressure) is different than someone who isn't starving and steals food(not under pressure). The person under pressure is probably not a thief under normal circumstance - but he has to steal to survive.

It's amazing how anyone can go through life and think about it so black and white. This thread is rife with confirmation/survivor bias. We're talking about going to an office and creating some widget in 90% of circumstances. Most of the "pressure" is made up. This isn't war or the jungle.

If some percentage of panicky people have good coping mechanisms, but averaged over all panicky people, having a good coping mechanism is still less likely than for non-panicky people, then it's still efficient to filter out all the panicky people. Probabilities matter and it's better if you pick from a group that is more likely rather than one which is less likely, even if you miss some good people in the less likely group.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com