Hacker News Reader

Comment by davemel37 | Hacker News Reader

In a utopian world you would be right...But in the real world, even the good guys might screw you if it ever turns into a situation of You Vs. Them.

Ultimately, if having to choose between feeding my family or feeding yours, the choose is obvious even to nice guys.

Especially when you consider that sometimes being nice to one person is being cruel to another.

The key is to protect yourself...when dealing with bad people you know where you stand, so you have strong motivation to demand contracts, etc...

When dealing with genuinely nice people, whom you would never dream could possibly screw you, thats were you are most vulnerable, because you are less likely to demand the contract and protections you need, and when it comes to them vs. you, they will often choose themselves...

Semi Related - I read a quote from Warren Buffet that really resonated with me, "Honesty is an expensive gift. Don't expect it from cheap people."

View on HN

How about this quote?

"I've got my family to feed" - Latrell Sprewell

I hate when people make it like its a feed my family choice like they live in a hut somewhere. Above a certain level of income the "feed my family" excuse is simply that. An excuse for otherwise inexcusable behavior.

Just be nice to people, its not that hard. The world especially the tech world isn't a zero sum game.

I used to work for a guy who cared deeply about all his employees to the point where he bought me a car when mine broke down. Than the recession hit, times got tough, he had triplets, got a divorce and even had to lay off half his company.

He made promises to me when times were good that he couldn't keep when times were tough.

He cared about me, and yet, for a long time I thought he screwed me when he went back on a deal he made with me.

Lots of people are nice, but back them into a corner (even only in their own minds) and their survival instincts will kick in.

It is simply naive to think otherwise.

Protect Yourself, especially with Nice people who you trust.

Look deeply at yourself here.

> But in the real world, even the good guys might screw you if it ever turns into a situation of You Vs. Them.

Then I guess the "good guy" in your world is only a seemingly good guy (as PG may state it) in my world, since it would be at the core of my definition of a good guy to be fair even in a "you vs. them" situation.

> Ultimately, if having to choose between feeding my family or feeding yours, the choose is obvious even to nice guys.

It is rarely as easy as that. How about feeding your family involving you screwing me over vs feeding my family involving nobody screwing anyone?

Again, in a utopia you would be right, but in the real world, there are legitimate conflicts of interest, and times where its a question of who to screw not whether to or not.

Even the nicest guys when backed into a corner will kick into survival mode.

Like I said, sometimes being nice to one person is being cruel to another.

> Ultimately, if having to choose between feeding my family or feeding yours

Employing this kind of (misleading) imagery is an unworthy tactic. Don't do it.

I would imagine no one ever does this unless they feel they have no choice.

I am not talking about opportunistic jerks waiting to screw you...I am talking about good people in bad circumstances... It is a very rare breed that can maintain perspective when their home is in foreclosure, etc...

That you're still saying things like "survival mode"† suggests that you're not absorbing what's being said. Call it maintenance mode (as in, "to maintain(2)"‡) if you want, and I'll buy that. But survival mode is far, far off.

† https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8920187

‡ http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maintain

You got me on a semantics issue... I think my point is still valid though.

Even really nice and good people might act in their own self interest when faced with a conflict. The perception of the magnitude of that conflict is relative, and a nice and good guys self-interest mode might be different than a jerks, but...

I still believe it's naive to think that when someone truly FEELS like they are backed into a corner, they will rationalize acting in their own self-interest, even if from someone elses perspective they are screwing them over.

We all have priorities, where we draw the line might be based on how good or bad we are... but everyone has a breaking point.

> You got me on a semantics issue

As of this writing, there are three responses to the comment of yours that I first replied to, each of them posted near-simultaneously with respect to each other. It's important to point out that all of them are calling you out on the same thing here.

(You downplay the issue when you throw out the "ah, semantics!" style resignation. This kind of comment is almost designed to frame it as if you were engaged in a debate over something and I caught you on a minor technicality that doesn't have any real importance to the actual topic at hand.)

Look, I'm not interested in "winning", or points-scoring, or something juvenile like that. What I am interested in is seeing the feeding-my-family "move" eliminated from honest discussion among reasonable people. This is precisely because the "I have to feed my family" refrain is dishonest and–as I said before–an unworthy tactic.

I don't know how to make you to understand this if you don't by now.

> I don't know how to make you to understand this if you don't by now.

I feel the same frustration as you :)

> This is precisely because the "I have to feed my family" refrain is dishonest and–as I said before–an unworthy tactic.

One last time I will try to explain my point. I agree, This argument might be dishonest, and should be eliminated...

but... That doesn't change the reality on the ground that many people, when feeling like they are about to lose something important will view it as a You vs. Them Scenario.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com