What is Digg?40 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Notice how well the author of this article has read the digg community. He knew exactly what to say to get to the Digg front page, instantly giving his own theory credibility. Now that is a jedi mind-trick if I've EVER seen one.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8He uses an elaborate Shrek "onions have LAYERS" argument to explain how people are guarded with stranger..
FTA:
The outermost layer is that part of our personality that we reveal to strangers - the most superficial aspects of who we really are.
Around our friends and some acquaintances we feel comfortable enough to peel back that outermost layer to reveal the next one.
The third layer is reserved for those with whom we have an intimate relationship with, such as a close friend or spouse.
The fourth and innermost layer contains that part of ourselves that we don’t share with anyone.
Not sure I can agree with that at all. The only difference between the way I act around my close (and not so close) friends and my girlfriend of 3 years is that I usually warn my friends before I fart.
The article seems to say very little while making assumptions that everyone is a disengenuous, manipulative prick. Go head, try and make me open up. You just won't hear it coming until it's too late. - invision, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10wtf why do people have to bring politics into everything? no one cares you douchebag.
- burnstyle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6it should be noted that this article is part 1 of 3
parts 2 and 3 have not been posted yet - jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5This is a skill I have been blessed with. I don't think I ever consciously practiced it, and I'm not some mystical idiot that believes in ESP or reading auras or anything. Being a fairly accurate and quick judge of people is not as fun or useful as you might think. Only people who have known me for a long time trust my judgment, other people think I'm crazy. I can't count the number of times I have been harangued for being "too quick to judge" and whatnot. Even the friends and family who have known me for a long time still ignore me about others most of the time. I'll grant you that I'm wrong sometimes, but not a lot. I'm bad at a lot of things, but sizing people up is not one of them. That being said, the skill is particularly useful while driving. My friends joke that what I see out the windshield is 5 seconds into the future. I can tell when someone is going to make a left turn in front of me without a signal, or change lanes without a signal, etc. I'm sure it's just some slight movement they make with their vehicle or something, but I can just "sense" it before they do it. I think it really just boils down to being observant of very small details. This also causes me to be a very picky consumer ... noticing the one pin-sized air bubble in a six-foot glass aquarium, for instance. So, it's kind of a curse as well as a blessing.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7How about blocking you then?
- fadeaway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's been my experience that the most reliable method of being a good judge of character is to be a good person.
People I know who are honest, trustworthy, and loyal are immediately able to weed out the less than nice individuals, and seem to have a sixth sense at detecting goodness in others. It always seems to me that the people who are arrogant, self centered, and shady are the ones who loudly proclaim themselves to be good judges of character, but they are usually flawed in their analysis due to the fact that they project their own twisted views onto the actions and motivations of others.
The exception to the rule, of course, is people who are SO honest and trustworthy that they trust anyone immediately and tend to believe that everyone had goodness in them.
The key, I think, is to be a good person, but to also retain a healthy streak of cynicism. ;) - Kahnza, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I find this usefull because I have Asperger's. The more I read about people and social interactions and why people do the things they do, I feel that I can slowly learn to compensate for my lack of ability to understand. If only a little bit.
- RonaldLewis, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Interesting find. Because the world is dishonest and selfish, any bit of knowledge to help avoid toxic people is helpful.
- Twango, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The idea that people we don't know well can be read with assurance to any depth is pure caca.
If they are heavily socialized then you'll be responding to common everyday fare about as nutritious as MacD's.
Other people have spent a lifetime learning to be indeciperable chameleons, or master liars, often starting as kids. They can, for example, apply for jobs in dozens of fields on all levels, get the jobs, and keep others fooled for months ... despite knowing very little.
That's how deep the rabbit hole goes. It takes a lifetime to make a decent start, not another flashy article claiming to have all of the answers. - Dopamini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I always thought ogres were like onions.
- thomleidner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6wtf does this has to do with the price of tea in China????
- DarkSideofMoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Before I started going out in public and going out with my friends at parties, I would stay home and keep to myself. At that point (although I didn't realize it at the time) I didn't really understand how people acted the way they acted.
It wasn't until about grade 12 that I started going out and socializing with people that I started understanding how people tick. Now that I'm in college (or something equivalent) and going out more and more, I'm learning the social aspects of the people around me, but also about myself.
My reasoning is that the more you hang around people, the more you learn about society in general, and moreso, about yourself. The kids who keep themselves locked in their basements and watch lame movies on YouTube or talk to their internet friends via instant messenger (at least the ones I've seen) don't understand how people work. They lack very basic social skills. Not making any generalizations here, it's just what I've seen.
In the end, if you want to learn more about people, you have to get out there and start exploring people. Don't shut yourself in... - invision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm modding you up, but by friends, i think he meant more like...social acquaintances, i.e. the people you talked to during lunch at school, but they never came over to your house, and grouped your "personal" friends in with intimate relationships.
- Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3From his onion layer theory:
"The fourth and innermost layer contains that part of ourselves that we don’t share with anyone."
and...
"here’s a little secret: a person will reveal their layers in direct proportion to you revealing yours."
Maybe it's just me but every time I try to get them to reveal the fourth layer they run from the room screaming. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't anyone can be taught this kind of thing.
Human beings are social animals, these skills are in almost everyone. I think people develop them if they just interact with other people enough and watch.
It never fails. If you see someone who is a social clod you will see someone who interacts with people on the minimum ( as well as someone who isn't as happy as s/he could be ) - superfuz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Jerbaker,
I notice lane changes before they happen too.
Socially, I tend to know who are decent people and who are not.
My problem with it is I often get swayed into codependent friendships with people. You know, those who if they would just do XY+Z would be a lot better off than they are now. I try to encourage them and then find myself also not doing XY+Z as I've invested some of my "energy" in trying to help them.
With strangers it feels like "pinging" from The Hunt for Red October...
I say hello (the ping), and it's not just whether they say hello back but the very fiber of their voice that determines what I think of them, combined with facial structure & tension, and eye contact. I feel I know more about a stranger in 3 minutes than I wish I did.
It's at it's worst as a curse when you know someone would be better with you than with an ass and they go for them anyway. - Zique, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I find it weird that he suggests prejudices would always taint our ability to read others. A lot of things like political alignment and education are good indicators for something else, but I think he wants to say that it's essential that we learn to replace that information.
- ChillyWilly5280, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Way to 'jack a thread there AlwaysDuggDown. Wonder why you picked that nic? Anyway, here's a big fat PLONK for you.
- grafenberg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7
- jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think a lot of people are confusing the ability to engage in social situations without committing serious blunders with being able to make fast and accurate judgments about what sort of person you are dealing with. Are they honest or a liar, do they know what they are talking about or are they a "Cliff Claven", are they a danger to themselves or others or are they full of hot air, etc. The skill of sizing up and accurately categorizing strangers you encounter is a much different skill set than having good social interaction abilities. I tend to be pretty shy, but I am an excellent judge of character working with minimal information.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Kewl! A reference to "Catch Me If You Can" and the "Matrix" in the same comment!
I agree that there are some who can decieve you no matter how good you get at psyching people out. Actors lie with their body language all the time - that's how they act. Con artists would naturally read stuff like this avidly, just so they'd know all the tricks. - dpierce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2In the '30s actually. I listened to that on audio book and also recommend it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I realize that this is part one of three, but so far the article seems to have a lot of empty space to it. The example for projection is wrong. That example is actually denial; projection is where you are angry but can't face it so you tell the other person that THEY are angry. Actually, extreme reflexive projection reminds one of schitzophrenia.
The thing on preconcieved notions based on the way people dress is also something I disagree with. As any Arthur Conan Doyle fan will tell you, you can tell a fantastic amount about people by the way they dress.
But then, I've always been a little obsessed about people's fashion choices. A co-worker might think I'm ogling them, and actually I am barely restraining myself from asking what's with the black jeans, Doc Martens, tie-dye sweat shirt and jangling, clunky, turquoise earings - are you in transition from Hippie to Goth? Is the purpose to distract people from your negative body image or express rebellion? Maybe you just have a sense of humor or you just grab whatever and throw it on without caring? I never get to ask the really interesting ones.
Mind you, I could care less about fashion itself. It's the psychology - people pick their wardrobes to project a specific image (in the article's terms, the 'outer layer'), which can reveal all kinds of stuff about their position in life, insecurities, self-esteem, beliefs, and quirks. Guess I'm just autistic in that respect.
I hope parts two and three won't degenerate into that "no eye contact means they're lying" *****. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well, as good as that might sound. He isn't the one that posted it..
- jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I know what you mean 100%. You're never going to have a good time with women man. I'm not trying to insult you, but I mean you are going to have a very difficult time with them because they do not engage the social world with logic. Women are much more in tune with feelings and the emotional side of human relationships. Our way of looking at the world is alien to them. Women don't want problem solvers, and they don't want you to give them advice. They just want somebody to pay attention to them and compliment them once in a while. If you start offering advice they'll take it as a lecture. Trust me. It took years for me to learn that.
About knowing who is decent, I know what you mean. And contrary to what people on Digg might want you to believe, politics does not correlate with decency. I have friends that are literally communists and friends that go to church twice a week and vote a straight Republican ticket even though it pains them to have to vote for such liberals. They are all decent people who disagree on some things. We all hang out and have fun (and poke a little fun too). - 574lk3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2although whats mentioned in the article is obvious to most,
couple it with dale carnegies; how to win friends and influuence people,
and your on to a winner.
i found dale's book invaluable as as teen in the 90's even though the book was written, what in the 50's? - hoopers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Are we all still on Digg? Everyone is being so civil and thoughtful, well-spoken even. It's creepy. I feel dirty in that clean sort of way.
I tried to add my thoughts, but really...y'all got it covered.
*walks away shaking head* - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2If you are interested in reading people, there is a book telling exactly how you can become an expert at it. It was written by a guy who made himself rich and famous by reading people: Doyle Brunson's Super System.
- invision, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1from a social engineering standpoint, this is useful. i can think of a couple other applications for day-to-day life also. +digg.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Your amazing blasts of idiocy and incoherence only makes us dumber, jagoff.
I'd continue but you've wasted enough people's time with your random hatred. - dbug, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Bunch
Of
Crap - dongcha9, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0doesn't this lead u down a road where no one can be trusted? U have to trust some people no matter how corrupt they may seem to pierce into their innermost layers and earn their trust and then......they are yours for the taking!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5Tea in China is Always Free....your question is moot. But I will be happy to respond if you would like to know how Kerry's anti-military stance might effect....say....the price of marshmellows in Brazil. Markets are funny that way, but don't laugh....you'll miss the move.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Have you been drinking? This is a rant completely non-related to the article.
I'll digg you up anyway, even though I'm not a neocon I can see you are not either, rather someone who is very upset at the system - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3alwaysdiugdown,
'We need this guide for the libbos who are actually saying Kerry "botched a joke"'
I agree.
but just a word of advie, dont expect any kind of rational thought from the digg libs. just like the replies to your comment, all you ever see form them is profanity, insults and sometimes even racist attacks. cant really expect much more from the so called 'tolerant' libs. iI know i dont! - Leo21k, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1I don't see how anyone could think it was anything but a botched joke. Do you honestly believe a politician would be so retarded as to say such an obviously stupid statement like that seriously?
He would have to be brain dead to think he could say what he did and not piss off more then half the counrty. Think what you want but I'm just saying that no ones would be that stupid. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3Hatred of what? Hating is only done by the poor and the perverted. Hating me only adds to my mystery as the mysterious one of Digg.com
It's so obvious that you can't understand it, yet you cannot help but fall into my trap and digg me down and reply. Amusing to say the least, Supercalafragalisticexbealadocious to say the most. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -23/+4Digging me Down will only make me stronger, young Jedis.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -45/+5We need this guide for the libbos who are actually saying Kerry "botched a joke"
Was it a "botched joke" when Kerry said that US troops in Vietnam reminded him of Ghingis Khan?
Was it a "botched joke" when he said US troops were "terrorizing women and children" in Iraq?
Ahh...but this one was, right? He really meant to say that if you don't get an education like President Bush didn't with his Ivy-League degree and Ivy-League MBA, you will become President and put the country in a bad war. Makes sense. Funny.
Why can't you loser libs just ADMIT that you DESPISE the military as an organization and that you PITY its individual members?
This is what happens when you guys actually say what you believe instead of trying to pretend to be Republicans every election cycle. Don't believe me? Watch the ass-kicking your boy Lamont takes on Tuesday by an Independent with no party ground-game behind him. Amazing.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is