News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by fractionalhare on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @01:09AM (#24046844)
For that sort of crowd, you wouldn't really cancel a major clothing faux pas by excelling in your choice of accessory.

That being said, it is also important to not look like you're trying too hard. Rolex and Omega are typically loud in the same way an "improper" suit is. They might hurt more than help, whereas Patek, Vacheron or Lange would be more impressive. Socialites who care enough about these things tend to have a certain affected air about them -- they (ostensibly, if not actually) appreciate them for fine craftsmanship rather signaling, which becomes a signal of its own. It would be an easy outsider error to assume that signal is about how expensive the watch is rather than which expensive watch it is.

Subtlety is everything. It is important not to look as though you're exerting effort to fit in. And you can afford to break from the ingroup convention if your mannerisms are otherwise "correct" and everyone in the group is aware of your status.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by AstralStorm on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @02:20AM (#24047209)
The mannerisms matter much more than the clothing. Personal looks too, especially face, body shape and posture. Manner of speaking completes the picture.

You can pick up old money relatively easily even if they're in a frumpy grandma sweater, even from a distance.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by bonoboTP on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:53AM (#24048647)
I wonder if all that just comes naturally to them or it feels like the "prison" it seems to me as an outsider. Constantly caring about this stuff, buying new clothes, looking out for fashion trends etc seems exhausting. I'm the typical nerdy wrinkly T-shirt and jeans guy and I know I'll not get into high circles anyway, and subjectively it feels quite freeing not to care. I spend my time immersing in stuff I'm actually interested in, not any required stuff like watches and suits and fine wines and whatever else. Or perhaps to these people it's not a burden, they naturally care about watches and fine wine... I honestly have no idea but would love to once speak honestly about such things with insiders...

Edit: upon some reflection, perhaps my stereotypes are outdated and it's not really necessary for even old-money-rich young people to care about fancy watches and wines any more. I mean some base level knowledge is needed, but I have to remind myself that when I think they may have it worse in some respects I'm probably wrong. Why would they restrict themselves to rigid bullshit, if it's not pleasant? Probably the rules are more flexible today. Probably I'm totally blind to whatever the current actual class markers are as they are invisible to us.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by chrisseaton on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @08:12AM (#24049151)
I think your understanding of this is backwards.

The point is that these people don't care about fashion or watches or how much you spend on your clothes. They dress conventionally instead, which is a standard that only changes over the scale of a decade or so. The mistake outsiders make is to think that the point is to follow fashion and buy an expensive watch. That's why they don't fit in - they wear something fashionable.

Also, to defend the idea a bit, the idea of a dress code is exactly that purpose - so that you don't need to worry about what you're wearing or how much it cost or wether someone thinks it's fashionable or not.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by ip26 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @11:23AM (#24050866)
I always come back to the cinema image of the rich guy casually tossing the keys of his supercar to the valet. The reason it's "cool" is the effortless balance. He has fun with the car, but he is no petrol-head. To you & I it's an unobtainable thing, to him it's just another car.

That's how I've come to understand it. These wealthy types are not horophiles or sommeliers. They just casually appreciate beautiful craftsmanship & the taste of high quality alcohol- and who doesn't? Just look at how techies love machined metal laptop bodies, and the popularity of craft beer. The reason out-groups are quickly identified is because they cargo-cult the material things.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by benhurmarcel on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @04:59AM (#24048039)
> It would be an easy outsider error to assume that signal is about how expensive the watch is rather than which expensive watch it is.

Right, although Patek, Vacheron or Lange are significantly more expensive than Rolex and Omega.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by bergstromm466 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @05:09AM (#24048109)
I know maybe you’re trying to give advice, but all I think when reading your comment is: “what a pretentious prick, what a great example of saying nothing and adding nothing to the conversation“ - your comment made me cringe. For me you’ve illustrated the point well that many in the existing elite - with inherited privilege, knowledge, and position in hierarchy - are ruined by money and obsessed with status signaling through 'elite consumerism' as a form of identity.

I mean, there are human beings who are making these ridiculously overpriced vanity watches day in, day out, in a miserable factory somewhere. All I see when I see these ads for Patek Phillippe, or similar, is a hopeless human doing work that they won't benefit from.

I wish rentier capitalism would end now, so we’d all live in a Commons-based peer production life where everyone was fed, instead of this ‘some people will buy a Ferrari and a rolex today, and some children will die from malnutrition’-world.

Luxury is a scam. The ultra rich (read: dominators) are just as anxious as the Precariat, scared to lose it all. Not to mention their kids are often ruined and unbearable people. [1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maWdDl_OjlQ

-

Edit: when I write "Patek or similar" I am really talking about any type of 'luxury good', like a Prada bag, or a cheaper-than-Rolex Michael Kors watch etc.

The people 'defending' Patek are missing my point (or I am missing them?) My point is that living in a world with artificial scarcity-creating systems is disturbing to me (Rentier Capitalism by Prof Guy Standing)[1]. It constantly surprises me how our priorities became the way they are with many of us in chains, and a few rolling around in a pool of blood-stained gold and diamonds. [2],[3]

[1] https://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-08-03/book-day-corru...

[2] https://vimeo.com/242569435

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7iv1fef6qo

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by threedots on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @05:57AM (#24048360)
I think you are underestimating the skill and craft involved in making some of these watches. Have you actually seen a movement? They're not made in a sweatshop in a low cost geography by some human drones. A watch maker is a high status craftsman and can be influential in their own right (look up the story of FP Journe if you doubt that). If you come to Switzerland you can see the actual factories for many of the producers in the area around Geneva and they are more like pharma manufacturing plants than fast fashion warehouses.

It's very uncharitable to assume that because you can't see the craft in something that it doesn't exist or is a scam. I couldn't taste the difference between two kinds of whisky if you put a gun to my head but it doesn't mean other people can't or that it's some kind of status game in disguise.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by bergstromm466 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:23AM (#24048495)
> They're not made in a sweatshop in a low cost geography by some human drones.

What the hell does that mean? 'human drones'

> It's very uncharitable to assume that because you can't see the craft in something that it doesn't exist or is a scam.

“I don't believe in charity. I believe in solidarity. Charity is so vertical. It goes from the top to the bottom. Solidarity is horizontal. It respects the other person. I have a lot to learn from other people.”

― Eduardo Galeano

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by ramraj07 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:19AM (#24048470)
What are you blaberring about? I agree that these luxury watches are mere status symbols and not a necessity, but no one's selling them at 90% margin. A considerable amount of highly skilled exclusively first world labor goes into these watches, and these devices are probably the single best type of objects where the labor that went into it is patently obvious right in front of your eyes. In fact, that exactly IS the symbol here for the most part, the fact that it's a human creation whose value is purely of the labor (the good kind) more than something that came out of the earth, and something, all considered, that holds its value over time instead of being ephemeral. I understand the angst and anger against the plutocracy but logic needn't go out the window in pursuit of an outlet for that anger.
Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by TheOtherHobbes on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @10:21AM (#24050238)
Luxury watches - maybe. Although the fact that these rare and unique precision-made craft pieces are incredibly bad at basic timekeeping compared to a $5 Casio, which is in turn pretty average compared to a $50 World Time Wave Ceptor, is both hilarious and sad.

But luxury handbags and other "fashion" items are inexcusable, because they are literally assembled in sweat shops by slave labour and then sold for four/five/six/seven figure price tags to vulgar stupid people.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90279693/did-a-slave-make-your-s...

The point of this kind of luxury isn't utility or quality - it's pure status display, combined with narcissistic indifference to the fate of the unfortunates whose work is being displayed so ostentatiously.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by ip26 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @11:30AM (#24050944)
... incredibly bad at basic timekeeping ...

A modern minivan is faster than a classic Porsche in virtually every metric. That doesn't lessen the appeal of the Porsche; speed isn't the point.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by bergstromm466 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:22AM (#24048487)
> whose value is purely of the labor (the good kind)

What's the 'bad' kind?

> logic needn't go out the window in pursuit of an outlet for that anger

Many of these watches are Swiss. Switzerland is (or was) a known tax-haven...

It's our inability to connect the dots that baffles me sometimes. Where else do the wealthy elites get the kind of cash needed to buy these watches?

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by 082349872349872 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @09:19AM (#24049637)
The US (a country without a wealth tax, and an income tax that only applies to realised, non-loopholed, income) can be a more effective tax haven than switzerland. I believe various ex-british islands may also part of the reason we get this particular bit of anglophone[1] two minute hate[2].

Yes, we're part of the Global North. We have a relatively high standard of living now, due to not having blown ourselves up twice last century, before which we were considered poor in relation to our neighbours. Compare Heidi. (Iodine in salt may have helped immensely, too.)

[1] the brits may still be salty that our bankers did to them what Soros did to thailand. Someone's gotta make sure The Market stays efficient, innit?

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23975900

How are worker protections in your jurisdiction? Solidarity is an ideal invoked here even by the pro-free trade pro-small business centre-right party.

(One way our rich flex amongst themselves is on the Züri equivalent of Groundhog Day: they ride horses around a giant wooden snowman with explosives in its head after it's been set on fire. The faster it goes boom, the better the summer will be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reuJ8yVCgSM&t=58

One can tell the Zürchers are a bunch of capitalist pigs who'll be against the wall when the revolution comes[3] because although the holiday is celebrated on a Monday evening, some of them don't even get the day off.)

[3] at the end of Cold War I, we learned we'd had a secret https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay-behind unit active on our soil. This was a scandal, because we are not a Nato member. Thank you, UK!

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by ramraj07 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:51AM (#24048640)
The good kind of labor is where the people doing it are free, compensated and satisfied.

If we are going to avoid Switzerland because it's a tax haven then we should probably avoid doing any commerce with any country, including the one you probably are in now (unless you're in NZ or something).

And with regards to your update - no one is talking about faux luxury consumer goods here; in fact an argument can be made that the _only_ sustainable mode of consumerism is the kind practiced by these luxury watch makers if antrhung.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by mhroth on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @07:26AM (#24048836)
High quality watches were coming out of Switzerland long before it was a tax haven. [0]

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/style/international/what-...

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by fractionalhare on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @07:31AM (#24048861)
Sorry, I should clarify that my comment wasn't intended to be advice or endorsement of the situation. I was being descriptive, not prescriptive.

I don't really have a dog in the race when it comes to whether or not such veblen goods should exist. I agree they are often only sought after as status objects, but I also can't discount the possibility that some people really do appreciate their craftsmanship.

Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by pegasus on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @05:48AM (#24048309)
I'd be surprised if those people making Patek watches are not extremely well paid craftsmen who really love what they are doing.
Re:Physical attractiveness bias in the legal system (2017) by bergstromm466 on Tuesday August 04, 2020 @06:29AM (#24048527)
> well paid craftsmen

As opposed to "a sweatshop in a low cost geography by some human drones", like another person who replied wrote?

You do know that the Global North is hoarding IP, and that another world of Commons-based peer production is possible, right? We could all be 'well paid craftsmen' if we shifted to that. In my eyes, you're showing an incredible privilege here, being aware of, and talking about, Patek watches.

Uppppper class. [1]

[1] https://vimeo.com/242569435