The vital art of talking to strangers

https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2021/07/10/the-vital-art-of-talking-to-strangers

by abhiminator • 5 years ago

249 270 5 years ago

Is there a non-paywall version? I can’t read the article but my gut reaction is this: talking to strangers is dangerous.

https://xkcd.com/642/

nafix• 5 years ago

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but that's a sad way to view the world.

e40• 5 years ago

That’s not the message of the cartoon at all. Quite the opposite.

bordercases• 5 years ago

Go away. Stop talking to us. We don't know you.

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

Haha this is totally just social anxiety. Both ends actually. The belief that the girl next to you on the train is thinking you’re cute and ignoring her and the belief that she’s gonna react like that.

A real version of that comic would probably have her thought bubble be like “I hope the meeting at five doesn’t run over. I’ve got to go pick up that camera lens from Best Buy. And what’s traffic going to be like. Should I just get it shipped? Hmm, I wonder if it’ll make it here before the weekend. But I want an excuse to get out of the meeting. Is that too much? Maybe.” or something like that. You know, the same stuff you’re thinking.

I have stranger-interactions all the time and most people are actually fairly eager for them. In fact, about the most you’ll ever see is lack of interest, which occasionally happens but will manifest as them being minimally civil.

Most people don’t want discomfort anywhere in their vicinity so they won’t confront you. Like they will barely confront you if you cause them harm, they _definitely_ won’t confront you if you’re neutral.

bittercynic5• 5 years ago

I've noticed the same pattern - people are usually very polite if you address them - and it makes me more reluctant to strike up a conversation with nearby strangers. If they really don't want to interact with me they might not give me a clear signal, and I might be causing extended discomfort for someone even though they are acting like they want to continue the interaction.

I'm trying to get smarter about reading social signals, but for now I just try to make sure not to corner people. I will not attempt to interact with you unless I can see that you have an easy way to get away from the interaction.

Are there classes or something available for people who know they're lacking in social skills and want to get better?

watwut5• 5 years ago

I dont know why this was downvoted. It sounds to me completely realistic.

phpnode• 5 years ago

I'm surprised to see this reaction from a sales person, isn't this a major part of your job?

underseacables2• 5 years ago

Actually it’s not, and there’s a difference between talking to strangers for business, and talking to strangers in social situations.

bell-cot• 5 years ago

Try disabling javascript in your browser. At least in the U.S.A., that lets me read most paywalled articles linked from HN. (Yes, cool multi-media content is lost. Parent's complaint was "can't read the article".)

haspoken• 5 years ago

https://archive.is/DFIdE

emptyfile• 5 years ago

Yeah, talking to strangers is not a thing in my country.

Can't say I care for it.

pmoriarty2• 5 years ago

"talking to strangers is not a thing in my country. Can't say I care for it."

What country is this and how do you ever meet new people?

Are you saying people in your country don't meet strangers at bars, parties, through participation in sports, at dance clubs, or special interest clubs?

Also, while you say you don't care for it, you do realize that you're talking to strangers right now, don't you?

upgrejd• 5 years ago

Judging by his comment history it seems that he's from Croatia but Croatia doesn't fit his description so I don't know...

graeme• 5 years ago

I highly doubt this is true of any country. All countries are full of humans.

Anyone making this claim has a severe sampling problem. If you personally don’t talk to people, you can be under the impression that nobody talks to people. The people that do talk to people can read signs for who wants to talk and they talk to each other.

The false impression is further reinforced if you go outside the country because as a foreigner people are more likely to talk to you, offer help, etc.

Your evidence would be stronger if you were a person who did care to talk to people but found that in a certain country nobody replied.

trompetenaccoun3• 5 years ago

Agreed, but to be fair people rarely mean it literally when saying something doesn't exist in their country - it was probably more in the vein of that 'it's uncommon'. There certainly are differences and in some cultures it's a lot more common that people talk to random strangers as compared to others.

Zababa• 5 years ago

People are people, but people interact differently depending on the country. Here in France, what we often hear about the USA is that they have very different social norm. The usual story is: someone goes to the USA, they are successful, everyone is nice with them, they have tons of friends, then suddenly something bad happens to the person, and all of their friends disappear/refuse to help. So from that I deduce that people in France in general (at least in my sphere) have less but deeper friendships. That's not a judgment of value of course, but that's one way countries can differ.

popctrl• 5 years ago

I grew up outside of Detroit, MI. Talking to strangers does not seem like much of a thing there. The first time I spent more than a week outside of Michigan was in Oklahoma. I would be walking down the street and people would not just say hello but ask me how I was doing and then actually listen and make conversation. At first I thought they were trying to scam me or something. When they'd approach, I would step back, take a mental inventory of my pockets, and evaluate my surroundings. Eventually I realized they were just being friendly!

People may have a different experience if they are more extroverted, but some places really are friendlier than others.

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

Perhaps the problem with social media is that it’s not social. It’s actually oratorical media. In a physically social setting, people do the thing the article quotes: they recognize that interaction with diametrically opposing viewpoints is possible if they exercise tact to eschew controversy until having built common ground.

That isn’t possible at scale because there is no common ground at scale. And online, everything is at scale. You are definitely talking to everyone.

jcims• 5 years ago

Totally agree.

Even without the opposition, there's a similar issue about having vulnerable conversations. I had a buddy over last night and he relayed an experience he had in NYC a few weeks ago. He was at a bar and saw this guy that just looked like he was in a bad place. He debated for a while whether or not to say anything but ultimately decided to break the ice and offer him a drink. The guy said he had to pace himself b/c he was going to be there a while. My buddy's intuition was that this guy was close to walking in front of a subway train, so he said something along the lines of 'hey I'm happy to give you your privacy but I guarantee I'm a great listener'. The guy then proceeds to say that he and his oldest son were what he called 'vocal twins'. They sounded identical to each other in timbre and phrasing and mannerisms and everything. Well, six weeks prior, his son committed suicide while away at school. Obviously devastating to him and his wife, but eventually life has to start to resume. The guy was just getting started back at work and was on a call. Meanwhile his wife had just arrived home from grocery shopping, and upon hearing him on the phone immediately starting screaming and running into the room thinking her boy was back.

Talking it through, this guy and his wife decided that he would leave for a bit...but he wasn't sure how to know when it was ok to go back if his voice was going to trigger her that much. After that, my buddy and this guy proceeded to talk for another two hours about kids and life and work and I can't imagine the guy felt worse after.

My buddy is a natural extrovert and 20 years of being a lawyer in NYC has tuned his social instrument to a level that's rather magnificent to behold. If you tried to repeat this scenario on Twitter or in a subreddit or here on HN, all of the non-verbal cues that started and sustained the (IMHO very intimate and vulnerable) conversation would be completely absent.

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

A fascinating story. Thank you for sharing. I love these tales of human interaction. The thing I find surprising is that if you stop and interact with random people, you'll have a plethora of these kinds of stories.

That is, they sound rare, but in reality they are super common. And the only thing stopping you experiencing them is playing the odds.

holdenc• 5 years ago

Brilliant story. This is the NYC that I remember.

abhiminator• 5 years ago

Beautiful story. Please pass on my gratitude to your lawyer buddy for making that stranger's life better. Gosh, HN can be wonderfully soothing sometimes! :)

dQw4w9WgXcQ• 5 years ago

From my experience these sorts of conversations come much more easily in rural diners and country grocery stores than NYC bars (or at least places where people aren't generally trying to "be" someone). And it really doesn't take much tuning of any personal social instrument, just a willingness to lay one's own instrument down and enjoy the unique sound of another's.

taeric• 5 years ago

I would love to read more in this vein. I've complained that so much of Twitter is talking to the crowd by nature of yelling at people. I did not know the term oratorical.

the_snooze• 5 years ago

It's also a smaller distance to close to find common ground in meatspace than online. In physical spaces, you gain a ton of information about social connections and interests just by who's where. If I'm at an academic conference (the regular in-person kind), odds are very high that the other attendees have similar esoteric research interests to mine. And if I see a friend talking to someone who's a stranger to me, it's likely that "stranger" is only two degrees of separation from me.

That isn’t possible at scale because there is no common ground at scale. And online, everything is at scale. You are definitely talking to everyone.

The term for this is context collapse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context_collapse

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

Cool! Thank you for the terminology info.

throwkeep• 5 years ago

Yes, it's a public performance more than a conversation.

vuciv1• 5 years ago

You can say you don't enjoy interacting with strangers, but I realize you should realize that you're taking the time to comment on an anonymous social platform.

Even if you're just reading the comments, you're listening to what strangers have to say

deregulateMed6• 5 years ago

The difference is choosing to engage or closing the web page.

Plus, I have no problem talking with programmers about their jobs and hobbies.

Compare that to talking to a program manager who's hobbies are comic book related... I'm not sure what to talk about with them... Maybe virtue vs hedonist philosophy? (They do comic books, they are clearly hedonists)

KittenInABox• 5 years ago

They do comic books, they are clearly hedonists

Are comics significantly more hedonistic than other media? (I'm genuinely asking; I've never been interested in comics but I've also never heard that they were all that different from other entertainment media.)

stronglikedan2• 5 years ago

I think Mike Tyson managed to eloquently sum up the Online vs IRL interactions with strangers when he said, "Social media made you all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it."

watwut5• 5 years ago

Threat of violence amd violence is not actually improvement over people talking angrily.

munificent17• 5 years ago

I have a hypothesis that almost all of the US's current cultural problems would be solved if once a month we all cooked and shared a meal with another randomly chosen family.

deregulateMed6• 5 years ago

That sounds like fun.

Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year. Just remember that the 90% doesn't like talking about their jobs. Hope you know the latest sportsball news...

That being said, there's usually other commonalities to discuss.

war10255• 5 years ago

Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year.

Always good to lump the Christians in with the alcoholics.

stolenmerch• 5 years ago

Depends on if this proposed program is voluntary or involuntary. I suspect the folks to self-select to sit down with a random family to cook and share a meal may not identify with the demographics you point out.

munificent17• 5 years ago

I've met lots and lots of Christians and a decent number of alcoholics. Most are very nice folks, just like all the non-Christians and non-alcoholics.

scotu2• 5 years ago

yeah, and please talk about social issues and that you have a partner of the same sex! just like in family meals that's going to go down super well! /s

yaitsyaboi• 5 years ago

I think you're overstating this based on the internet. Sure, there are aggressively intolerant folks and maybe too many for this to work.

But the vast majority of folks aren’t going to get into a flame war over diner while staring into someone’s face. They might say crude things but they’ll probably also learn something.

I think the only thing that makes this idea really questionable is the proliferation of firearms in American culture

trompetenaccoun3• 5 years ago

Food for thought: Maybe there's something wrong with your family if you can't share a meal together in peace.

Like families, societies need shared values. If a third of the population is religious extremist, another third believes in freedom and liberalism and the rest in Communism, fascism, or something even different, there is no common ground. I'm a tolerant person but I can't sit with people who preach that we should be treated differently depending on what race or gender we are. Or that gays shouldn't be able to get married. Diversity is good, but under a common denominator. Unchecked multiculturalism breaks nations apart. Smart people get divorces when they realize their partner is a disgusting swine who abuses them. Free societies need to do the same with groups promoting ideologies incompatible to their core values.

galfarragem• 5 years ago

babblingdweeb• 5 years ago

This is wonderful. I have been studying communities and food as a way to rebuild trust...this sums it all up nicely. I have been looking to start up a local "potluck" type idea --note: not my idea, many people do this already.

I just thought a little rough organizing might be nice.

mc32• 5 years ago

This already assumes people are good and get along and are high trust.

What if I’m in a crew am a nice talker and get to scope things out for my crew as we chit chat?

It’s the same thing that did in the lonely hearts clubs. Swindlers came in to the rescue and take advantage of a lonely set of people. In this case people who are open and inviting and trusting of random strangers.

munificent17• 5 years ago

This already assumes people are good and get along and are high trust.

It does assume most people are good, but that is something I believe deeply in my bones. (A simple logical argument is this: if people were on average harmful, we would all choose to be hermits. Since we don't, it implies that in aggregate our human interactions are a net benefit to us personally.)

It does assumes that people can choose whether or not to get along and that most people will choose to do that when placed in an interaction with strangers. I think that's a safe assumption for probably like 90% of groups of people.

It does not assume high trust. You only need to trust your dinner companions enough to not poison you or attack you, which is not a very high bar.

It’s the same thing that did in the lonely hearts clubs. Swindlers came in to the rescue and take advantage of a lonely set of people.

I think the stakes a low enough to not make the situation much of a honeypot for bad actors. There's little to gain beyond a meal and my hypothetical "game" would require all participants to sometimes be the cooks.

iammisc29• 5 years ago

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly.

However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable.

We are reaping the rewards.

I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have the same concerns, and values. I can't honestly say that about other people

edmundsauto6• 5 years ago

This is a rosy view of religion, although I accept that is your experience and perspective, and thank you for sharing it.

To me, church attendance is about making the in/out group very clear. You may feel close to different political views based on your single church or flavor of Christianity, but that's still a pretty limited group.

I think church membership has become undesirable because 1) fewer people believe in the supernatural and 2) the stated positions of many major religions on issues of abortion and inclusion.

teachrdan• 5 years ago

However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable.

This comment appears to be a dog whistle, so please do correct me if I'm totally wrong here. But this reads like "Democrats / the left have demonized belonging to a church / Christianity," which is a common right wing talking point. Is that what you're saying here?

ssully• 5 years ago

Yeah, I too long for the days past when the US had less cultural problems/conflicts due to high church attendance numbers.

AnIdiotOnTheNet3• 5 years ago

When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches

The mere act of belonging to any given religion pre-selected certain ideas about how the world works and should work. Hardly "all political stripes".

bsanr2• 5 years ago

"At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing and Christ has no east or west, we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation." It's difficult for me to justify buying into the idea of Christian social life as the source of American unity when 10 years ago participating would have seen me bombarded with the reasons why my homosexuality would see me burn in hell for all eternity, or when 200 years ago it would have seen me bombarded with all the point of scripture that justified my being treated as property. This is as someone whose grandfather was a deacon; I can't imagine what people whose families don't have a church tradition at all must think of this suggestion.

I do think that the segregation of social life is at the heart of much of this country's ills. However, perhaps that has more to do with things like, say, Bill and Sally's frankly hysterical fear of sharing a street with the Freemans. How to reduce social division in America in the long-term: ban private schools, fund public schools at the national level, and do it quickly, utterly, and irrevocably. I don't know if you would end up with a single, continental American nation, but the part left still known as "The United States of America" would be profoundly united.

Even if you disagree, you must understand that the notion that everyone must attend church for America to achieve some measure of unity is about as radical. The focus must be on the bringing together of disparate communities, secularly.

munificent17• 5 years ago

I think church is great for mixing up people who differ professionally and socioeconomically. But at least in the US it has also very much deepened the racial and (obviously) religious lines between people.

nicoburns• 5 years ago

It's religion not politics that makes church-attendance undesirable for most non-church-goers. Having said that, I agree that we are missing something that modern secular society is missing something that used to take place in churches.

I'm not so convinced as you that the religious aspect is required to make it work. Shared purpose maybe, but there are lots of ways of creating that. In another comment you mentioned "might as well be a community centre", which I think is interesting because community centres are one of the other places I've this sense of well... community.

One thing that churches have other than religion which I think often gets overlooked is money (in particular they generally own the building they use). I've seen more than one excellent community centre closed down because they ran out of funding and couldn't afford to keep paying the rent. I would love to see a concerted effort at government funded secular churches designed to serve a parish-sized community.

socialist_coder2• 5 years ago

Totally. As a devout Anti-theist I really wish I could join some kind of secular group that was identical to a church but without the religion. Go every Sunday with my family, socialize with the folks, have potlucks and events, help people out when they need it, etc. We need to bring back this sense of community.

amelius• 5 years ago

We used to call this going to church.

Elementary school was the same. Military service with enforced conscription is also similar.

jdavis703• 5 years ago

However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable.

I personally stopped going to church because of the politics coming from the pulpit. The last sermon I heard was the preacher saying Barack Obama was “demonic” because his weak foreign policy made it harder to spread Christianity throughout the world, therefore forestalling the end times. Of course it wasn’t just that one sermon: the homophobia, the sexism, the anti-science attitudes had all been bothering me for years before I finally quit.

wonderwonder• 5 years ago

Plenty of people still go to church but attendance is declining as the popularity of the churches morals, biases and lessons fall out of favor. One could probably argue that as the larger Christian sects have become associated with politics that decline has accelerated. It does not make sense for people who don't believe in god or hold different views on what is moral or not to attend . With that said I am sure you are quite right that having something in common such as church attendance, etc. leads to community building but only as far as between those already in the same community, Catholicism, southern Baptist, etc. I do think that people would be well served to get involved in large organized groups but optimally ones that are not bent on separating people into us and them. I don't think that a decline in church attendance is in any way the driver of societies ills as church attendance was sky high in the 40's and 50's and did not go so great for everyone. My personal opinion is that social media, echo chambers and the ability to isolate oneself by having most of ones superficial needs met via technology is the cause.

princeb• 5 years ago

When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches

"It is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is eleven o’clock on Sunday morning" -MLK

silicon24013• 5 years ago

Your hypothesis is based on some utopian assumptions. I can't tell you how many people whose views or mannerisms I hate, and who I can't stand being around. Forcing me to eat with anyone, let alone strangers, would only make me dislike them more and cause tension. My utopian solution is for people to have more space and be farther apart, rather than everybody crammed up in cities.

munificent17• 5 years ago

I can't tell you how many people whose views or mannerisms I hate, and who I can't stand being around. Forcing me to eat with anyone, let alone strangers, would only make me dislike them more and cause tension.

I think you are either an unusual outlier or are very much underestimating how well you can get along with people different from you when sharing a meal with them in person.

People are not who they appear to be online.

hluska6• 5 years ago

We’re all different and if this is who you are/how you’re most comfortable, congratulations on figuring yourself out. My experience is different than yours - people are tremendously interesting, especially over a meal.

I’m not sure that anyone involved in this is making utopian assumptions. Rather, we’re all different and just know ourselves. I’m likely as ‘correct’ as you are - we’ve both figured out how we’re happiest around others! That’s a net win for us.

amoorthy• 5 years ago

There's a startup doing this :-) http://www.makeamericadinneragain.com/.

They were profiled on NPR a while ago I recall.

tclancy2• 5 years ago

Ha, I thought of trying to build an app for this, even if just to get neighbors to share a meal. No one feels like cooking every day but if we could share the burden thusly it might help foster a sense of community.

coding1232• 5 years ago

if forced, be prepared for a lot of murders on those nights.

munificent17• 5 years ago

We will sort out our differences one way or another!

foobarian• 5 years ago

Earlier on I had hopes that Facebook would implement "random friends" or "guest friends" in order to make the social graph denser and more diverse, thus making the world a better place. Not the direction things went I guess...

war10255• 5 years ago

You can gain the acquaintance of quite a few strangers by joining groups.

My town has a general discussion Facebook page. I don't know that any of the people would recognize me on the street, but there are quite a few names I recognize now. This has been really handy since I didn't grow up here, and in small town America that often means people just won't get to know you because you "don't belong".

Also my wife is involved in several interest based groups. Mainly related to sewing and thrifting and such.

I don't know that it makes the world a better place, but it certainly can expose you to people you wouldn't otherwise ever have interacted with.

Invictus02• 5 years ago

Sad to see so many cynical replies. When I was at RPI, we had a club that organized dinner parties much like you describe. You can check it out here: https://thedinnerpartycollective.com/about

socialist_coder2• 5 years ago

You're spot on. Anything that increases your exposure to strangers and builds trust will be a boon to society.

This is also the case with social clubs and sports leagues. Membership of these things has been in decline for decades and is now at an all-time low. Being in a bowling league or the rotary club with random members of your community did a ton to increase basic trust in society. Which in turn, makes everything else work better.

Source: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/trust-me/

This is why consuming video content, specifically streaming services with all-you-can-stream crap is so damaging. People no longer have time for shared dinners, clubs, or adult sports leagues because they'd rather binge watch a new series every week.

siquick2• 5 years ago

This is why consuming video content, specifically streaming services with all-you-can-stream crap is so damaging. People no longer have time for shared dinners, clubs, or adult sports leagues because they'd rather binge watch a new series every week.

In my experience it’s not that people would rather watch videos than see their friends or do their hobbies, it’s that they’re working jobs which consume their lives to the point that watching Netflix is pretty much all they have the energy for. And before you know it, you don’t have any hobbies anymore so you watch more Netflix and the circle continues.

arrosenberg• 5 years ago

I think there are other issues driving the decreasing social activity - Netflix seems to have replaced existing TV practices, I don't think it vastly extended them.

IMO, access is one of the biggest hidden issues. Everything is designed to require a car, which increases the cost/time/stress of doing anything, and decreases the number of available people to interact with. Neighborhoods built before WW2 are much more interactive and walkable, but we keep pumping out convoluted suburban layouts instead.

Over time, peoples' dopamine system starts weighing the hassle as greater than the potential reward, and they become less socially active. If more people lived within a 5-10 minute walk of these activities, membership would go back up.

acituan4• 5 years ago

Anything that increases your exposure to strangers and builds trust will be a boon to society.

It takes a few bad exposures to ruin your mental model of strangers. And I am not convinced it is entirely a bad thing.

The concept of being surrounded by strangers is a 20-21st century urban phenomenon. In an environment where people are not strangers to each other 2 things happen; 1) they can build a more accurate model of each other and most of the time this leads to deeper reciprocal trust 2) they know their behavior is kept track by others and that changes individual behavior (I know, not always for the better. I am not trying to romanticize small town conformity). To expect the same dynamics in a city is a romanticism of different sort. Not trusting strangers because you don’t know them is rational. At least not to over-extrapolate your trust to every stranger you see.

All you can stream crap is there because there is demand, because we are going crazy in our loneliness created with truncated interpersonal reciprocity of the urban life. If you removed Netflix today, it wouldn’t automatically improve our social lives, because the structure and organization of it heavily depends on the economic demands that shaped the living arrangements in the first place.

See how even tech is capriciously resisting remote work and thus an alternative, less lonely arrangement for the workers.

ww520• 5 years ago

There should be an app like table-for-six to let strangers come together to have lunch, not for dating but just having a meal together.

Nimitz14• 5 years ago

That's what the draft was great for.

trashface• 5 years ago

Terrible idea. Families don't want to talk to single, middle aged guys like me. I don't need any new enemies, thank you very much.

tomrod• 5 years ago

Unless you have had food poisoning from a potluck, or had a schizophrenic neighbor joke about putting ground glass in their chili at said potluck (it definitely had some kind of grit).

No, I don't think forcing sociality is the right solution, though I am on board with encouraging community events generally.

nr2x2• 5 years ago

Yet my tolerance for casual racism is low, and depending where you are in the country, that’s definitely on the menu.

Moodles• 5 years ago

For awhile Sweden had Call a Random Swede https://www.theswedishnumber.com/ where if you called the number, you would literally be paired with a random Swede to talk about whatever you want.

NikolaNovak• 5 years ago

That. Is awesome. Sorry I missed it!

chenster• 5 years ago

Isn't it an app for that??

webo• 5 years ago

Is that much different than chat rooms or Omegle?

mudita• 5 years ago

Here they call the number in the British television show QI: https://youtu.be/zUrYRdIxYp8

culopatin• 5 years ago

In the US that would end up in a lot of unwanted phone sex

taxicabjesus2• 5 years ago

The most important thing about learning to talk to strangers is practice. Taxi driving gave me lots of new people to talk to every day. Sometimes they weren't new. I didn't remember them, but they remembered me on account of my previous efforts to get information out of them.

[edit: if I was starting this today I'd be a ride share driver. But I've learned enough, and don't feel the need to drive people around again.]

Here are other ways Nightingall suggests breaking a script.

I figured out where my passengers were going, "Are you going anywhere in particular, or do I get to choose?" No one hires a taxi to take them to a random location.

One lady, who was with her family, said "we can go anywhere you want." Two seconds later she said, "too late, we're going to the movies." 'DRATS! That was my chance!' Thenceforth I resolved to be prepared for when people took me up on my proposal of picking their destination.

One woman said we could go anywhere I wanted, as long as she got to the bus station by 10pm. We had plenty of time, so we went to the 5 & Diner for dessert. When I dropped her off at the station, my passenger said it was the best birthday she'd had in quite some time. (I never heard from her again.)

If you say something generic, they will say something generic. If you say something specific, they are likely to as well.

I assumed everyone was a native Arizonan. If someone was a transplant I'd ask "Oh, did you move here from [specific city in the upper Midwest]?"

Strictly speaking, there are more people in Arizona from California than [specific city]. But California is 800 miles from Mexico to Oregon, and if they were from California they'd say, "Duh", whereas if they're from [specific city], they're usually either impressed, or they wonder how I knew.

One fellow did not have that upper-midwest vibe, but I'd had experiences where I switched it up but would've been right. He said "no, bunch of damn communists from [upper midwest city], I'm from Oklahoma."

"How'd you find your way to the desert?" IIRC that passenger was in the Army (Green Berets), and they needed an airport with a thick enough runway to support their operation (he didn't say 'in Central America', but I realized he was talking about the Iran/Contra operation). Scottsdale was their airport. He said something about Lt. Col. North getting crucified by Congress, iirc. [0]

"Do you have any food in your apartment, to go with your vodka?" She did not, I stopped the meter and took a detour to McDonald's. That passenger is doing quite well now, and no longer suffers from prison-induced PTSD.

Not all passengers got my usual script. I just got a call from a woman who I first picked up at her parents' house. The Phoenix Police officer said, "have fun with this one." She was in fight-or-flight mode, getting kicked out by her parents (who had custody of her daughter). As soon as we pulled away she broke down. She was a very expensive passenger. I hadn't heard from her for maybe 5 years (when she'd just been approved for SS disability). She found my number last week, it was nice to hear from her.

[0] "North formulated the second part of the plan, which was to divert proceeds from the arms sales to support the Contra rebel groups in Nicaragua, sales which had been specifically prohibited under the Boland Amendment." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North

haecceity2• 5 years ago

You should be a writer or something

taxicabjesus2• 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment, it's appreciated. These anecdotes are what came to mind as I read the fine link.

I originally posted diary entries to kuro5hin.org (RIP). They started out as 'these were my passengers today'. Later I picked themes to write about... I re-posted the diaries to my own domain, https://www.TaxiWars.org/ (Show HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12193273 ). My comments on the Show HN picked out some of the more important pieces.

There are some other stories in my HN posts. Maybe I'll mine those for a memoir. That reminds me: Michael Crawford (not a passenger) greatly appreciated my efforts on his behalf: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19489570 . Michael was a member here, but couldn't abide by the HN rules...

Aboh332• 5 years ago

As a related anecdote, I used to perform experiments by dressing in particular ways while going out in public. If I wore a nice blazer-type jacket and generally looked more preppy, I would definitely notice different behavior as when I might dress with with a t shirt and long sleeve over it with long sleeve shirt unbuttoned. I attribute this partly to conditioning via TV show characters etc.

tgv• 5 years ago

Or the tv characters dressed that way because of general perception, of course.

pmoriarty2• 5 years ago

I spent a day trying to smile at strangers. The result was that half of them gave me a "do I know you?" look, and the other half looked at me like I was crazy and backed away.

Not encouraging...

zh32• 5 years ago

I remember a teacher who cycled to work every day, along a coastal route. Because he saw the same people so often, he set himself a goal to smile at all he recognised so they'd smile back.

Last time we spoke, he was still battling one obstinate hold-out (while reminds me of an old joke - 'smiles' is actually the longest word in the english langugage because there's a mile between the s's).

bittercynic5• 5 years ago

I think this very much depends on the circumstances. Few working-age men walk in my neighborhood, and some people seem a little uneasy seeing me walking. They don't know what to make of me.

On the other hand, if I walk a dog it is clear what I'm doing, and people are quick to share a smile. It seems like many people are uncomfortable unless your activity fits into a pattern they're familiar and comfortable with.

stronglikedan2• 5 years ago

I think that largely depends on where you are, and what the cultural norms are. I go out of my way to smile at everyone I see, and most people smile back, even if it takes them a double-take before they do. I'll never not smile at someone, because it's a known stress reliever to do so, especially when my smile elicits another's smile.

AlexanderTheGr8• 5 years ago

Interesting attribution to conditioning via TV show characters. What was the difference in people's behaviours?

Aboh332• 5 years ago

Similar to the Apple Store experience above, mostly but even in the way people will look at you both good/bad

xcambar• 5 years ago

For many reasons, I grew accustomed to fit into many diverse social groups.

It's not only about the way you dress, but also which "side of you" you present to others. I mean, what I've learned is that there are many "I" available in me (and everyone, please generalize at will), and too many people consider wrongly that they're "one and only" and that it's "being true to oneself" to only expose one side of themself.

This is wrong. I, you and everyone, we are all individually a multitude and using this multitude to get yourself what you want (friends, information, jobs, sex, you name it) is not only a skill, which would sound a bit too utilitarian, but also and most importantly, it is a way to acknowledge yourself and let the others know the multitude and complexity and diversity of you.

And I think it's awesome.

haecceity2• 5 years ago

What were the differences???

ZephyrBlu2• 5 years ago

You tend to draw more positive attention when you dress nicer.

yencabulator• 5 years ago

This one time, I visited an Apple store at an upscale mall to pick up a laptop (needed urgently, I damaged the previous one by spilling a drink on it). However, I happened to be dressed to the max because of a fancy event that I was returning from. I carried the Apple-branded bag with me while seeing if I could buy some miscellaneous clothing (T-shirts and underwear) while there.

It is ridiculous how much more attention I got from every shop attendant throughout the mall that day, compared to my usual comfortable cargo shorts and T-shirt look.

That "experiment" still makes me sad. We treat humans like garbage if they don't look rich enough.

andreyk• 5 years ago

Has literally anyone on this thread read the actual article? Seems pay walled to me...

I don't view it as an issue, but maybe HN should start allowing "Let's Discuss" type submissions without a link to an article? That seems like what happens in many cases anyway.

Anyways, on the topic of this article, yep it's important!

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

Mate, we have subscriptions to The Economist but the comment pinned at the top is a paywall bypass. Of course we read it.

OJFord• 5 years ago

It's not disallowed, you can post a text submission. 'Ask HN: Ever had an interesting conversation with a stranger? Recommend it?' or something.

(The body can contain URLs, so you could still link 'this made me think about it, but for x reason didn't think it was a food submission itself'. I think the reason it doesn't really happen is probably that the only value for x that really makes sense is 'the article is broader than that and I want to discuss a more focussed point within it'?)

Noos• 5 years ago

I dislike these kind of books, since they are designed to overcomplicate things by appealing to the mids and upper-mids needs to follow authority, defer to expertise, and use checklists and systems to try and remove any unpleasantness from interactions. "This common thing is really important! Because of science! Here is a study! Here are the health benefits! Let's also tie this into reducing climate change! I have used my big brain to give you a blueprint of how things should go! It's all good, because someone on the book jacket is wearing a lab coat!"

I honestly await titles like "The Lost Art of Petting a Kitten," and "Outdoors; the Secret Benefits of Putting Your Laundry Outside to Dry."

I'd also suggest the authors to follow the nifty trend of profanity in the titles of these self-help books. "I Don't Give a Fuck: The Vital Art of Talking to Strangers" and "Badass: The Power of Strangers" might help sales among certain demographics.

holycrapguys• 5 years ago

This is so true it hurts. I've wasted so much time on shitty books like this.

renewiltord7• 5 years ago

Delightful! I loved this comment.

beezischillin2• 5 years ago

I grew up as a very lonely child so I struggle a lot with talking to strangers, usually the idea way more than the practice. Knowing that I’ll have to call a stranger on the phone or go to a social event full of unknown people stresses me out to the point of often thinking of many ways of how I’d like to get out of them. In social situations I struggle to let go and have to put enormous amounts of energy to act ‘normal’, yet most people don’t even pick up on it. I guess I’m good at pretending. Despite that I don’t hate people and I quite enjoy listening to them when a topic that even mildly interests me comes up, I’ve done a lot of work to broaden my horizons so thankfully that list of topics is quite long. I often wonder if other people are even remotely like me or if all this comes easily and naturally to them at all times.

It does have the advantage that there’s no real difficulty increase between a very difficult social event or conversation or just am average one. Or I can drink quite a lot and still seem normal. I grew up thinking that I’m defective and need to keep to myself and I had to self reflect a lot to overcome that.

Despite this, I quite understand and appreciate the need for socializing, crazy amounts more than I did as a child. I wish I could teach young me that because social situations resolve conflict and create opportunities and those create a healthier all around environment and often a better future for all those involved.

dd444fgdfg• 5 years ago

you sounds like me. I think you're very normal if that helps.

r6203• 5 years ago

This sounds like the „textbook definition“ of social anxiety which is understandable growing up lonely—and not learning social skills which many people take for granted later in life.

Maybe you want to take a look at improving this aspect of your life so everyday tasks like calling a stranger etc. doesn’t cost you that much energy.

For me classic exposure therapy helped in that regard and reflecting on the specific situations that I was thrown into afterwards (calling someone, asking for something in the store etc.)

JohnFen2• 5 years ago

I'm fundamentally introverted, but one day I realized something that made it much easier to talk with strangers: they're strangers! So what they think about me is (usually) of no actual importance. If I make a fool of myself, no harm done!

peterburkimsher• 5 years ago

This. I hear some people talk about how they find a trusted friend to share their personal thoughts with, and who can hold them accountable.

I take the opposite approach: I trust strangers more! Especially those who are about to leave the country (e.g. CouchSurfing meetup back in the day, hopefully BeWelcome when COVID ends).

Even if they gossip those secrets, who cares if they're half the world away?

technothrasher• 5 years ago

I often wonder if other people are even remotely like me or if all this comes easily and naturally to them at all times.

I can't speak for others, but yes, I am more than remotely like you. I hate the phone, and for much of my life I had an incredibly hard time talking to strangers. As I've grown older (I am quickly approaching fifty) talking to strangers has become easier. I think it's because I care less about what they think of me. Parties can still be hard, but it has become more that I'm uninterested in bothering to carry on a conversation with many folk rather than what used to be more afraid to do so.

But when visiting a local museum the other day, I decided I wanted to talk to the curator because I was fascinated by the museum and had so many questions. So I just walked over and introduced myself. We've now had a very productive email conversation going for the past few days. Even ten years ago, I would never even have thought of doing that.

theshrike79• 5 years ago

it's because I care less about what they think of me

This is the key point. I figured the same thing out some years ago and talking on the phone has gotten a lot easier.

You are not the main character, nobody cares who you are or what you do. 99.99% of people you meet every day won't remember you at all.

Just talk, be cordial and go about your day afterwards.

vosper• 5 years ago

In social situations I struggle to let go and have to put enormous amounts of energy to act ‘normal’, yet most people don’t even pick up on it.

Have you tried having a couple of drinks? There’s a reason they call alcohol a “social lubricant”

ZephyrBlu2• 5 years ago

Only a couple of drinks is unlikely to reduce "enormous amounts of energy" that much.

the_only_law• 5 years ago

It’s a curse and a blessing. The inhibition makes it’s much easier to comfortably converse with a stranger, although the quality of discussion is likely to be trash (I can barely enunciate technical things verbally sober, and mostly sound like an idiot trying to after a few beers). The inhibition is also likely to make me discuss things that will give others a negative opinion of me (over sharing, etc.). Perhaps less of an issue when everyone in the conversation is drinking, less so otherwise.

beezischillin2• 5 years ago

Molly was the closest thing that made me feel how it would've been if I grew up different :)

stevewodil• 5 years ago

Knowing that I’ll have to call a stranger on the phone

It won't necessarily help the buildup of anxiety about the call itself, but I've found that I'm much more relaxed when using wireless earbuds on a phone call than when holding the phone to my ear. I'm not sure why, may be something to do with being able to freely move my hands.

herghost• 5 years ago

I used to really overthink making a phone call. To the point that I'd avoid it if there was any way I could. Professionally though, I couldn't avoid making them, and so I moved into a very strange cycle of rehearsing everything I'd say. Not the points I wanted to make, literally running through permutations of actual conversation that might happen. This would consume huge amounts of time and effort.

Two things came of that: firstly, the conversations almost never went as I'd planned. All my effort was for nought. Secondly, it dawned on me one day that when someone called me, even when it was an unknown number, I'd take the call within a few rings and it would generally go perfectly well. I obviously didn't get several hours of sweating over permutations before I picked it up, I just picked it up.

I slowly pushed myself over to the point that I would plan the outcomes I wanted from a call but leave the detail alone. Each call became a sort of game where I raised my points and tried to get my outcomes. I got quite good at that to the point that I didn't need to pre-plan my outcomes - I obviously already knew them (since I was writing them down) and so I went on to rely on just having a normal conversation.

The final lesson I picked up on this journey, primarily from talking to other (usually more senior) people was that if the person I was talking to opened up in a friendly way and put me at ease the conversation was easier. And so I started trying that. Instead of my assuming that I was unimportant, or a distraction from someone's day and trying to be really terse out of what I considered respect for their time, I just eased back. Asked how their day was going. Asked about something I knew that was going on with them. Asked about something we shared organisationally, etc. When I took the time to be more human with them, and less mechanical and efficient, the calls always went well. Even when it wasn't something we shared an outcome over.

And so I got to the point where (during the pandemic) I talk to people all day on Zoom calls and don't give a second thought to it.

I suppose my point is that from a similar starting point I was able to break the negative thinking cycles that were causing my anxiety around calls, so hopefully others can too.

JSavageOne3• 5 years ago

One's life completely opens up when one realizes that it's possible to talk to strangers and meet friends / romantic partners anywhere, anytime, in any situation. Sure most interactions may not amount to much other than sharing a moment, but every now and then you make a friend or even romantic partner that makes it all worth it and then some. Walking outside goes from being what may have been a mere mundane chore, to endless opportunity.

I'm not a naturally social person - actually growing up I was extremely shy and lacking in confidence. But unlike many on here who seem to be content living like hermits, I was never content being shy and always had that curiosity and desire for human connection and social freedom.

So even though it was terrifying at first, I forced myself to open up and talk to people when I felt the inner urge to. It was very difficult at first - my head would be racing with thoughts like "What if I'm bothering them? What if they don't like me? What will that random person who overhears the conversation think?" and sometimes my heart would literally be pounding. But on the other hand I knew that that if I didn't do it I'd regret it for the rest of the day, and that no matter what the outcome, I'd come out a stronger, more confident, less inhibited person. Funny enough, the last two people I ended up approaching despite my heart pounding, they ended up talking my ear off, to the point where it almost seemed they wanted to talk to me more than I'd wanted to talk to them! Not everyone is this open of course, but I'm learning it's a lot more than I used to think.

I can genuinely say it's dramatically improved my quality of life. As a remote "digital nomad" solo traveler who's generally going to countries alone, it's an absolutely vital skill to have to meet people and live a more enriching life. Without this, your social circle is basically just limited to mutual friends and any in-person activities you participate in, which for me in any new city where I don't already know anyone is basically nobody.

For anyone who's wanted to be more social but hesitated due to fear of rejection or other peoples' judgement, I highly encourage you to stop living in fear of others' judgement and just live life on your own terms and go for it. It'll make you a stronger, more confident, less needy person (eg. I think too many people cling on to bad relationships because they don't think they can find better, which if they have no friends, initiative, and social skills might be true). My only regret is not doing this sooner. By not taking initiative, your social life is at the whim of other strangers who take initiative.

HeckFeck2• 5 years ago

If I may share a personal anecdote, I went through a lot before I even had the courage to do this. Then one of those chance encounters with strangers led to a great friendship. So I'm commenting to verify your story.

Though I need to do it more, it is very difficult to break this old habit which I believe was developed as a necessary survival strategy in my young days. The cynic inside me believes that I was broken in an effort to keep me around, from people who otherwise had nothing positive to offer. I sometimes wonder how many other people are being held at emotional gunpoint for the same reasons...

JSavageOne3• 5 years ago

I don't know the details of your experience, but one thing I'll say is that we tend to take less crap from other people when we've got alternatives. One should never tolerate disrespect from anyone whatsoever, but it's a hell of a lot easier when you've got other friends who treat you well, or at least you know that you can meet such people as opposed to having (extreme analogy here) some "forever alone" scarcity-like mindset.

PrimalDual• 5 years ago

I like your approach and I agree that it should lead to better outcomes. Sadly for the less socially adept, it’s not clear to me how to get social interactions from random strangers without having both sides of the equation be uncomfortable. My experience of trying this approach just ends with two uncomfortable people and leaves me with another social misstep to haunt me at night.

Since it sounds like you want to share your experience, would you mind sharing more details of how those first encounters went and why you even decided to talk to those people in the first place? Where do you hangout that you can just casually approach and start chatting up people?

JSavageOne3• 5 years ago

I wouldn't consider myself socially adept. At least if there's any adeptness at all, it's certainly not genetic or any natural skill, but from years of deliberate practice.

both sides of the equation be uncomfortable.

Why should you feel uncomfortable? Unless you have malintentions, which doesn't seem to be the case, there's no reason to feel uncomfortable. You're simply expressing yourself, spreading positivity, and giving the stranger the opportunity to connect with you.

I'm a digital nomad who generally travels solo to countries, so I have no choice if I want to meet people since everyone is initially a stranger. A couple weeks ago when I entered the locker room of a gym a man saw that I was looking for something, and told me "the bathroom's that way". After returning I said "thanks" and went to my locker. The interaction could've easily ended there, and my old self would've left it at that, but then I decided to ask him where he's from. Turned out to be a really friendly guy. A couple days later I invited him out to watch a game with some of my friends, we partied till 5am or so and had a great time, and spoke about potentially traveling together to some nearby countries.

As a single man (who hates online dating), when I see a particularly pretty girl my type I'd like to meet who seems approachable, I approach. Sure most interactions won't amount to anything - maybe she has a boyfriend/husband, maybe she's not interested, maybe she's not in the mood, etc. That's fine. And by the way, maybe I won't even be interested anymore after talking to her because attraction is way more than just physical. It's a two way street. (and don't buy into this crap that politely approaching someone is "street harrassment". One of my best friends met his wife on a subway train). No need to come up with some elaborate pickup lines or whatever, just be direct and upfront with your intentions, and then say whatever's on your mind. If they don't want to talk to you, that's their right - you have no entitlement to the attention of some random stranger, so don't take it personally.

In any case, it's not rocket science, and there's no need to overcomplicate it. You don't have to try to fit some certain mold. Just be authentic and genuine, and most people will appreciate you for it (so long as you're not being like an a*hole or something obviously). One of my friends who is the best at this is one of the quirkiest guys I know with interests and humor that many might consider esoteric, but he's successful because he's genuine and confident in his own skin.

It's probably going to feel awkward at first. Just take it all in, and focus on the process. Every step out of the comfort zone is a win. The "outcome" itself is out of your control and subject to extreme randomness so don't focus too much on that. The more you do, the more confident you'll be and the easier it'll get, until the point where it's no longer a "thing" in your brain, just like you probably don't get nervous talking to your parents/siblings.

Where do you hangout that you can just casually approach and start chatting up people?

Anywhere is fair game - parks, cafes, gym, street, whatever. Just be respectful.

FridayoLeary• 5 years ago

I'm thinking about the Tube right now...

MarcScott• 5 years ago

I can talk to strangers for hours with confidence and honest interest in what they have to say, but only as long as the stranger and I have a pretext to be talking.

Sit me and a stranger down in a room and tell us we have to talk about our opinions on package management, the best BBQ recepies or the latest Marvel film and I'm happy.

It's the small talk crap that I can't deal with. When I'm in a line at a supermarket, I neither want to talk to my fellow shoppers or the checkout person. I don't want friendly banter from the person selling me beer at the pub. I can't be bothered with trying to turn a pleasantry, exchanged while holding a lift door, into a fleeting relationship.

maverick-iceman• 5 years ago

I struggle with this a lot.

I keep thinking: "Those who are really great and relevant, they don't need to go talk to strangers, it is strangers who go and approach them"

This fuels negative thoughts about not being relevant enough so it's better to postpone any active social approach towards strangers up until I'll be relevant enough that they'd be approaching me instead.

I somehow feel that this is a consequence of teenager me being in awe of Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Metallica, Guns n Roses and Aerosmith. Getting the aforementioned attitude: "If you are good enough they'll come to you and you'd not have to do anything socially...just showing your talents"

Approaching strangers would be a defeat in a sense. Admitting that you are not good or rare or relevant enough to be approached by them instead.

Maybe that's why my favorite country is Brazil and the Amazonas region to be specific

sgerenser• 5 years ago

A few years ago my daughter was 3 and was going through a phase where she’d go up to any random stranger she met and ask “hello, what’s your name?” Talked to a lot of random people this way. Nobody can resist talking to an inquisitive 3 year old. I remember I was in an airport waiting for a flight to Boston and happened to talk to a guy who’s son just started college at the same college I had gone to. Which was surprising since it isn't very well known nor anywhere near Boston or where we were.

I was always torn whether the practice of a small child “talking to strangers” was dangerous but I couldn’t bring myself to discourage it.

diplomatpuppy• 5 years ago

My kids did the same thing - turns out it let them understand what normal behaviour looks like. When someone offered one of them something weird and dangerous, they recognized that it wasn't normal.

nr2x2• 5 years ago

Good point, I’ve also been a little wary, but this comment makes me feel better about letting the kids talk. Thanks.

Aside, favorite thing my kid did was say to a random old guy “hey pops, what’s your name”

EGreg• 5 years ago

So pickup artists took this to heart

philip142au• 5 years ago

This is silly, no stranger wants to be inturrupted

The vital art of talking to strangers

Related Stories