Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

  most people love what loves them back
That is exploitable. I tried it and it works. When I was 18 I got a job in a telemarketing boiler room. Two dozen people sitting at long tables with phones and scripts, asking for donations for various causes. Yes I should probably burn in hell for it, but I was a dumb kid.

The first day really sucked, but they let me try again and I came with a plan. Before every call imagine my feeling of love for that person. As I read the script, think "I love you grandma".

Something magical happened. I got like 3 donations out of 5 calls for the rest of the day. The boss was joyful, I was the flavor of the day. He presented me with an alarmingly large bonus when I left.

I was nauseated and never went back. That was my last job in sales.



The classic salesman tactic is that the salesman has to love the product. The best conmen have to con themselves first. They are basically method actors.

In our tech sphere we see this in tech hype circles where the early investors have to become believers and make new converts which turns into feedback loops of hype.


Do you think you might've been able to find a sincere, non-manipulative way of doing it?

For example, if you could quickly intuit whether and how much the person naturally would want and be able to donate, and you connect with them on the basis of that, and they might or might not pick up on that themselves, but no mind tricks of either of you?

One appealing thing about this is that it's using some of the strongest potential for manipulation, to try to avoid manipulating.


Probably not. You are taking their money. They become poorer because of your behavior. That doesn't fit with love, no matter how you try to contort yourself.


Technically correct and yet I feel this is wrong.

"Become poorer" is the technically correct part, but imagine a person with a million dollars in their name who donates USD 100 to a cause they like.

They have technically become poorer, but it does not matter to them, neither objectively nor subjectively. On the other hand, if the donation was helpful, they may appreciate you informing them about that opportunity.

Of course that all depends on lot of variables (e.g. "the charity is not a scam, but a genuine attempt to help others), but the basic idea that giving away money is always harmful to people I cannot agree with.

I would be delighted if someone I love spent some reasonable money and/or time on worthy causes.


It doesn't have to be love.

If it's for a good cause, the person would like to donate, and can afford some amount, then there's a role for cooperation in facilitating that.

As a facilitator, you can look at it like: here's a person who wants to donate, I approve of that, and I can help with that.

If you like the person for wanting to do that, and that comes across, and that helps them get past their aversion to sales in general, all the better.

Where it can go wrong is if you play manipulation games on them and/or yourself.

(Telemarketing modality of phoning and disturbing is a different problem, though. That's a reason not to do it at all, at least not that way. But manipulation can be averted.)


Observer effect also works for code created by humans.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: