I've also had plenty of terrible experiences with strangers trying to talk to me. But I think it's wrong to build a policy from that: I've also had plenty of great conversations with complete strangers, some of them in contexts where I'd be considered "captive" if I wasn't a willing participant (airplanes, trains, etc.).

IMO, serendipitous conversations are a key part of a healthy society. Few things have as strong of a humanizing effect.

> Few things have as strong of a humanizing effect.

This, unfortunately, is EXACTLY what high pressure religions/cults/MLMs use to their advantage.

I was a mormon missionary and one of the things we were taught to look out for is things to humanize ourselves. Literally "If you see toys in the yard, ask them about their kids. Are they washing a car? Ask if you can help. Was there a death in the family? Talk to them about mormon heaven." etc.

The key, here, was all about conversion. You find an opening and then try and wedge yourself in (with the ultimate goal of getting a new convert, because you are "saving" them).

Other cults are certainly worse (NEVER go to a "private" meeting!), but it's something to realize. Cults are successful because they try and use genuine humanizing effects to bring in new members.

This easily shades into love-bombing, which is a standard recruitment technique. "Oh, you're so interesting." Etc.

I deliberately went to a private meeting to see how all of this worked, and it was me and two recruiters with a huge picture of the cult leader.

Super awkward. We asked each other a lot of questions.

One of mine was "Are you sure you're not a cult?"

"Oh no. We're definitely not a cult. Why would you think that? Ha ha. Oh dear. No."

As cults go, I didn't get the impression they were very successful.

You should have stood up like "Dammit, I'm looking to join a cult. Sorry for wasting your time."

My experience with cults is that they’re not effective, they simply focus on the minority who are open to their line.

They even try to sound crazy, to discourage well-adapted people.

Like a Nigerian scammer who deliberately uses bad grammar so the only responders are people with dementia.

My experience with cults comes from being part of a large, mainstream church that had cooky and predatory groups operating at the margins of the congregation.

They would target new members who had severe issues: drug abuse, mental illness, having been trafficked.

I’m not sure if the Mormons have anything similar. I read about extreme fundamentalist Mormon groups, but they don’t seem to be recruiting mentally ill/drug addicted mainstream Mormons.

You’re right, but it’s important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Many people drive cars. Some people kill others with theirs, sometimes intentionally. We should not then assume every person driving a car is on the warpath.

I agree, I'm mostly advocating caution. Just like if you see a car swerving around in front of you, you might want to slow down and avoid. Sure, they might have just swatted a fly or something, but they also might be drunk.

The issue is that cult interactions are crafted to specifically play on social norms. They are HIGHLY manipulative. I'm not saying that you should assume everyone is a manipulator, but you should at least have a little caution while talking to strangers.

I had a college roommate that invited me out to pizza with him and another roommate. I accepted (what could be more normal) and he drove. It was a fucking "pesticide salesman" pitch. That was the last semester I roomed with them.

I think most people have too much caution when talking to strangers for the first time. I think one should be careful when taking things further - maybe meet in public for the first few meetings, so you can easily make excuses and walk away if things turn weird. This also makes recruitment much more expensive for these kind of sales / recruitment tactics,

Asking because I couldn't find the answer after some cursory effort, and feel extremely out of the loop.

What is a "pesticide salesman" pitch?

In my college, one of the more common MLM type things was getting recruited to travel to another state and do door to door sales of alarms and pesticides. With all the hallmark "You'll make a billion dollars!" types sketchiness. All structured as a standard MLM.

indeed, this hackernews page is one of the first page google results for that term. I'm curious!

There's an MLM for everything, including Camel milk.

Aptive Environmental looks to be the pesticide MLM.

> We should not then assume every person driving a car is on the warpath.

So you’ve never been to Boston

To be fair, at least some of that is the streets, not the drivers.

I was in Boston a while back and I came to a crossroads. There was no stop sign, no light, nothing. I eventually just had to... go. I got to my hotel and I asked about it, and the concierge was like, "oh, its just like that". I asked how people are supposed to know to stop (or not to) and he replied, "you just know". It baffled me because _clearly_ you don't just know.. because I was there and I didn't know. What happens if two people just drive through the intersection at the same time.

I get it that crossroads exist like this in the open nowhere. But... in a city? It was mind-boggling to me. Plus... the street layout in Boston was done by throwing pounds spaghetti at a wall and then trying to match the pattern that stuck.

If you know the rules of the road then there is no ambiguity about which car has the right of way at such an intersection. But most people do not know these rules, and therefore are mystified when there’s no light or sign telling them how to drive.

Exactly. It's all about having a mental model of how other people will probably behave.

In Boston, even though everyone drove aggressive, they were predictable. So I felt fine.

Whereas in San Fran, while not as aggressive, other drivers were just random. So I was terrified.

I'm older now, with much reduced acuity and reaction times. My recent visit to El Paso was the most nervous driving experience that I remember. Way worse than LA. I felt like a dog trying to paddle upstream, surrounded by river otters playing.

YMMV.

Given the confusion a lot of people have with the situation, it is absolutely ridiculous not have signs at such an intersection in a city. Arguing that people "should know" is pointless when the end result of not having signs is just going to be more accidents.

I agree that even in a small city like Boston it’s reckless to have uncontrolled intersections, precisely because people don’t know the rules of the road.

My comment was a response to ‘I asked how people are supposed to know to stop (or not to) and he replied, "you just know". It baffled me because _clearly_ you don't just know.. because I was there and I didn't know.’

When I got my license in New York I studied for the written test from a booklet that the DMV gave out. This exact situation was in there. It’s not complicated. But you’re right, there will be accidents, because, even though there are still driving tests, people drive around with “red means stop, green means go” as the only rule that’s stuck in their heads. At least in the US.

I did a bunch of driving in France and what struck me most was the near complete absence of stoplights and even stop signs. Where I was, admittedly smaller places, big intersections are usually roundabouts, and smaller ones have a yield sign or follow "priorité a droit" which is basically a 4-way yield where you yield to the person on the right.

I don't know the traffic accidents stats, but overall the system really does rely on people knowing the rules as opposed to signalization, and it (mostly) seemed to cut down on time spent waiting.

>I was in Boston a while back and I came to a crossroads. There was no stop sign, no light, nothing. I eventually just had to... go. I got to my hotel and I asked about it, and the concierge was like, "oh, its just like that". I asked how people are supposed to know to stop (or not to) and he replied, "you just know". It baffled me because _clearly_ you don't just know.. because I was there and I didn't know. What happens if two people just drive through the intersection at the same time.

You got there without incident didn't you?

Those sorts of intersections get treated like N-way rolling stops in practice. If there's someone who'll obviously be there first everyone adjusts speed so everyone can roll it without stopping. If multiple vehicles arrive at the same time negotiations ensue.

Does US have different rules about intersections of "equal" roads?

In Europe you give way to the car to your right and that's it. In the rare case where there's a car going in every possible direction, you just honk it out or light signal until one goes first.

The US doesn't really have those basic rules of the road the way most of Europe does. There are essentially no intersections that are not controlled at all by either specific signs or lights. Often, if one road outranks the other, and you're on the lesser road, they will have a stop sign for you and then reinforce it with "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP".

For example, in the UK, roundabouts will be perhaps signposted as coming up - but when you get there, you just yield to the cars already in it, because that's the base law. In the US, roundabouts are less common, and they have a yield sign at every entrance.

Boston is, however, a deviation. Many roads date to the founding of the city and are much like older European cities in terms of layout, but lack any modern signposting.

We do. Example from Oregon:

ORS 811.275

(1) A person commits the offense of failure to yield the right of way at an uncontrolled intersection if the person is operating a motor vehicle that is approaching an uncontrolled highway intersection and the person does not look out for and give right of way to any driver on the right simultaneously approaching a given point, regardless of which driver first reaches and enters the intersection.

https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_811.275

There are a lot of state laws that resemble each other, but there are often subtle differences. My point is that there is no overarching coordination other than maybe AASHTO (which can only make recommendations), and legislators are often only interested in the highway department if there's a contract they can steer to a friend.

Similar rules exist in New York as well.

I'd expect they exist in most places in the US.

> The US doesn't really have those basic rules of the road the way most of Europe does.

Yes, it does. But getting permission to drive is cheap and easy in the US, and many people don't know the rules of the road.

> There are essentially no intersections that are not controlled at all by either specific signs or lights.

There are lots of intersections without signs or lights, IME (admittedly, I haven't driven everywhere in the US.)

We also have a constant influx of new drivers from other areas, so local norms don't have time to gel.

This is wild, are you telling me that the United States has no concept of the four-way stop?

If I encountered an intersection with no signage at all, the default expectation would be four-way stop.

> This is wild, are you telling me that the United States has no concept of the four-way stop?

The US has the concept, but it's not (in California, at least) the default rule for an uncontrolled intersection. For a regular uncontrolled intersection, it is treated as a four-way yield, only a blind intersection (one with less than 100 foot visibility in any direction in the last 100 feet of approach) is treated as a four-way stop.

That's pretty much the same as all the states I've lived in. It does vary some from state to state, but I'd be surprised if that one did.

I love my city but I can see how this would be true for non-Bostonians. If Boston is your home you do just know, in the sense that you know other drivers may not know or care so you are on the lookout for them. You just curse those drivers when you think the've done the wrong thing and move on.

Still have to say though that this is less of an issue recently. Many fewer missing traffic signs than there used to be. I don't care for it :)

All true. That and even the kindliest Bostonian suddenly becomes a sociopath once behind the wheel.

On the other hand, the normally vicious Boston cops have true kindness by not enforcing any traffic laws. I remember a cop car pulling over to let us pass one time when my then gf drove the wrong way* down a one way street.

And a friend was stopped when driving on the wrong side of mass ave (a divided road with a barrier). The cop stopped us, give us both a stern talking to, and then let us go on our merry way.

* She is a physicist and her defense to me was “I was only driving in one direction”

Or South Florida.

A looong time ago, after the business part of a phone interview, I was chatting with a recruiter who'd moved from Boston to South Florida and he asked me 'Is traffic ...different... here?'

I gave him Dave Barry's explanation: "Everyone here drives according to the rules of their country of origin."

Which reminds me of Sao Paulo. I've never seen more aggressive driving or been gladder that I wasn't driving than in Sao Paulo.

For me it was SE Asia. No rules of the road, only the rules of a school of fish.

> Other cults are certainly worse (NEVER go to a "private" meeting!)

I’ve had friends joke about going into the scientology temple in Hollywood as a joke. I always warn against it; cult recruiters are practiced and you are not.

While not required, it is socially expected that 18-19yo mormon men serve missions.

People don't choose the religion they are born into

Bingo

I expect people to have sufficient cognitive capacities by the time they are 18 to choose their religion. Even earlier if you know English and have access to the internet. Although financial dependence on one’s family could require putting on a show.

Do you expect people to have sufficient cognitive capacities by the time they are 18 to choose their language? ¿Hablas español?

One could very well argue "yes", but first and foremost speaking the language of their offline communities is pretty likely, if only through sheer inertia and a lack of concrete reasons to question that choice.

At 18, one stands a very good chance of having spent one's entire life roughly within the confines of a single monoculture and it's morals, social pressures, religion, language, etc etc etc. - quite possibly with contact intentionally limited by one's parents (not all of us were blessed/cursed with unrestricted, unmonitored, and unfiltered internet access, and many parents do a lot of meddling when it comes to friends and other social connections as well.)

It's often shortly after, when said people go to college, that they experience their first true culture shock. To the point where some communities will outright discourage college (pressuring boys to inherit a trade, or girls to marry and become homemakers), or at least discourage going out-of-state, pressuring children to stay closer where they can be - if not controlled - at least kept in a similar social environment, where they obstensibly won't "lose their way", where they can be more readily influenced.

Not saying one can't break away at 18, but for many people, the question isn't "Why [become a mormon missionary]?" but "Why break with tradition, family, friends, and one's entire support network, just to skip a little missionary work?"

It really doesn't work like that. As proof of the large barrier to entry, look at the number of people who follow the religion they were raised with. The rational decision is "These people I know and trust have this belief, so maybe they are right".

A rational decision is still a choice, and I do not find it accurate to label it as "being born into". However, there is religion (assumptions held by someone in their mind) and religion (behavior that allows one to be part of a certain tribe). I can see the latter not being described as a choice if the person is dependent on the tribe.

> However, there is religion (assumptions held by someone in their mind)

If your entire community holds the same assumptions (or at least publicly claims to), and you haven't been exposed to meaningful dissent and opposing viewpoints to challenge those assumptions, one is likely to uphold the same assumptions without ever having meaningfully questioned them, or ever having made any kind of active "decision" about said assumptions.

To take a non-religious example, many of us grew up being taught and believing there were 9 planets in our solar system, and most of us accepted that without ever having meaningfully questioned the taxonomical decisions going into what exactly defines a "planet" versus smaller planetoids and how different Pluto might be from Ceres. We were born into a culture that seeded our assumptions, and we had no great need or reason to overturn them.

This doesn't mean we can't break away from the culture we were born into given sufficient resources and/or reason (one can form dissenting opinions, one can move, ...) but it often explains default behavior, and what one might chose if they don't even realize they're making a choice, if only through inaction.

Context is definitely important. If I'm in a situation where I'm obviously just trying to get some work done in a coffee shop, I'd going to be very skeptical of a stranger who insists on striking up a conversation with me. It's just too pushy and frankly kind of creepy.

However, I've also done some backpacking on the Appalachian Trail several years ago, and it's far more socially acceptable to start up a conversation with random people you meet along the way. It's understood that we're all strangers but we have a shared goal of hiking the trail, and what else are we going to do when we stop for the night other than chat a bit with the other people in the area?

Had almost nothing but positive experiences speaking with random people while hiking, except for one nutcase (trail name was Mountain Lion) who was carrying a firearm and disclosed to me that he was kicked out of the military for mental health reasons (got to appreciate his honesty, though). I made sure to put as much distance between the two of us ASAP. Later found out he ran out of food, tried to steal from other people, and had to get airlifted out after getting injured. Good times.

Certainly; context accounts for a lot. I wouldn't wish Mountain Lion on anyone :-)

I think what it boils down to for me is this: the world is full of loons. If we don't allow ourselves to be open to spontaneous interactions, the average spontaneous interaction we have is more likely to be one involving a loon. Those memories also tend to be more salient because of their negativity, so we need to be intentional in remembering all of the lesser but positive experiences we've had with strangers.

This is why "charity muggers" infuriate me - they're poisoning the well for everyone else.

a lot of those are actually a 3rd party sales/marketing company that is paid a commission of something like 20-30% of each signup. If you pressure them enough they'll admit they they are not W2/T4 employess of the charity they're pushing.

the vancouver area was plagued with the "because I'm a girl" charity muggers for years downtown

Helsinki was lousy with them when I was there a few years ago. Between the train station and my hotel, a 10 minute walk at most, every intersection had them.

I had one accost me and launch into her long spiel without me being able to stop her. When she finally paused to ask me something, I had to tell her I didn't speak Finnish.

(Of course she spoke english but didn't press after that. And now that I think of it, and on-topic I had a similar thing happen with mormons pitching me in German in the Köln area. When they found out I couldn't understand them, they - as Americans - switched to English and we had an interesting conversation between strangers about why we were all there. They did not try to further sell me on the religion other than some very fleeting "if you're interested" as we parted. Overall it was actually interesting to meet them. Maybe it would have been different if I'd got the German pitch, we had a few really awkward approaches from these kind of religions people (evangelizers?) in university that were not as pleasant, I don't know what faith though. )

I bought a nice truck in a bold color. Since then every few days total strangers come up to me and we start talking about trucks.

Completely blows my mind, but they have all been super nice people.

Every time I’ve rented a muscle car, I’ve had guys - it’s always guys - come up to me to talk about it. I guess you buy certain performance cars, you are joining a sort of fraternity. Something to consider in the whole when you’re shopping for one, I suppose.

Hah, I can relate to that. It is like being part of some secret club. Do you get the thumbs up from other drivers? Are you giving out thumbs up?

I bought a somewhat rarer car a year ago and it has been a similar experience. It feels very wholesome sometimes. Like as a nerdy guy sharing a thumbs up and a smile with someone who by all appearances is full-on gangster and very much far opposite on everything. But there's a common interest in cars and suddenly it doesn't matter as much. There is a lesson in there somewhere about judging people by their appearance.

My neighbor approached me so often, and/or yelled from across the street, about my 90s gas guzzler that one day I was so frustrated I waved him off shook my head and went inside.

I just couldn’t deal with it again and it’s one of the rudest things I’ve probably ever done. I feel bad but it was an entirely unconscious reaction. I know almost nothing about cars and I really don’t care about them at all.

He moved shortly after (hopefully unrelated lol), so nothing more ever came of that.

I'm confused. What aspect of your car did he want to talk about?

He mostly wanted to talk about his own muscle car. But my car was the entry point as an assumed mutual interest. He would come over and just start talking and I mostly had no idea what he was talking about and even said as much.

Well now I have to know what color

Lightning Blue

The new Bronco? OK that’s pretty sweet. I grew up in low rider country so that doesn’t strike me as bold, but it is a great color.

Has to be red

Well, petrol or diesel?

Definitely one of my favourite things about living in America is the willingness of people to talk. Only London beats it in my opinion, despite so many people claiming that it is British to mind your own business.

For me, it's Japan which surprises most people I tell that to, if you've ever watched midnight dinner, it's what happens in small dinners/izakayas, you go there by yourself and people will start talking to you.

You're not wrong, especially if you live in NYC or most of California. But this is a cultural thing.

Roberto Benigni type people are real, they might just not be around where you live. Consider moving. Whether you move away or towards where these sort of characters congregate is of course entirely up to you.

If you would like to know which places to seek out/avoid feel free to chime in.

P.S. - Please don't go to Rome and expect it to be filled with Benignis.

Best part about Austin outdoor culture is the random friendly conversations, met a dude who founded arcade fire like 6 months ago just because we we're talking about places to eat.

It's just part of Austin's hippy music fest heritage and is the best part.

> If you would like to know which places to seek out/avoid feel free to chime in.

Do you have a group where you meet up to discuss this kind of stuff privately? /s

Why you're in it already in this thread you ol' rascal :0)

ₜₒₒ ₗₐₜₑ

I’ve had more serendipitous and pleasant conversations in NYC and CA (both places I’ve lived) than anywhere else. :)

It’s not limited to Austin or the south. :)

Yes. I have found people in New York City to be generally enjoyable and willing to help. The same was true in Southern California, where I lived for years. My Chinese wife was blown away at how helpful Americans tend to be.

Yes, when my cousin came to visit me she was terrified that her family would be gunned down in the street.

You can’t tell from the news but Americans are generally friendly and helpful in person. The Borat film was supposed to show how deranged Americans are but the half I watched was all about people trying to be nice to him despite his antics.

> The Borat film was supposed to show how deranged Americans are but the half I watched was all about people trying to be nice to him despite his antics.

Precisely my reaction

That changes with kids fortunately.

Parents bringing their kids to playgrounds, that have not much to do except talking to other parents. Being at a playground with their own kid filters out most mentally unstable or interested parties.

Very easy to strike conversations if kids have the same age. Lots of opportunities for new and sane friendships, with who you can then double-date when their kid come home to play with yours.

Having a kid really expanded my social circle. Im a shutin hermit and she is a social butterfly and makes friends in seconds, so she probably knows 100x more people in our community than I do. So I frequently have to stand there hanging around with stranger parents because my kid is suddenly best friends with their kid. These interactions have grown to the point where we have a “local dads” poker night and all we have to do with each other is our kids’ social circles. It’s actually kind of wholesome.

Ski resorts are another one. Everyone is there for the snow so you can chat with folks on the lift or apres ski.

There is a selection bias at ski resorts. And plenty of the interactions are a single serving, so comparatively safe. I presume you can still get an elevator/lift pitch.

The MLM stuff is STRONG in the SAHM community, though. I don't get any of it, fortunately, but for the wife it's every other convo at the playground.

This is region dependent. In the US South its normal to have light conversations with strangers in public spaces (waiting in line, for example).

Yeah, I do this. I don't like just passing time on a phone like many seem to, so anytime I get bored(lines, DMV, airport, airplane) I'll strike up conversation. Then again maybe I'm just a bit mentally unstable...

I personally love when people do that. I'm a homeschooling stay at home father, so I don't have a wide or close social circle; I thrive on those casual conversations.

It's normal most places in the US, not just the south. I've had plenty of light conversations with strangers in public spaces in the Northeast.

The sad thing is that -- this is how I met almost all my friends. Through random conversations. I agree that random convos at work/school are much less likely to be MLM, but I always wonder about what i'm missing when I filter too much.

My best friend from college -- 25 years still -- is someone I met on line, waiting for lunch.

I get pretty annoyed with MLM sales pitches, but I dont think we should close ourselves off to the world with strict policies on social interactions.

That sounds like a miserable way to live. Do you have the same assumptions when others engage you in conversation over the internet, or is it only in person?

Only in person. I live in a major US city. When I was younger I would freely engage anyone who spoke with me. But I found myself in situations where I would be in physical danger sometimes being screamed at sometimes threatened after what began as a seemingly innocuous interaction. And I also got sick of people trying to sell me things or get money from me.

I remember in my late teens some guy on the street saying “Hey man! I like your shirt!” My Jimi Hendrix shirt? He must like Jimi Hendrix too. So I started talking with him and in a few minutes he was asking for money. Weeks later I’m wearing a different shirt and I hear “Hey man! I like your shirt!”

Once on a commuter train a guy struck up a conversation with me about a book I was reading. It was an interesting conversation. We kept talking as we exited the train and kept talking on the platform as all the other commuters went to their cars and drove away. Now he’s getting kind of excited and raising his voice. And I’m now aware of how large he is and how we are the only two people left at the station. I managed to politely get out of there.

Over and over again this kind of thing would happen until I just made a policy to not engage.

> until I just made a policy to not engage

That sounds sad. You remind me of a friend (probably on the spectrum), that is too open/polite and just doesn’t know how to filter out abusive people.

Unfortunately, the good people that are really really worth talking to, can often read that you are closing yourself off, so they politely won’t interact with you. The “bad” people will ignore your social cues. Perhaps there is a certain amount of channeling.

Most women (and plenty of men too) have been on the receiving end of excessive unwanted attention at some point in their lives, and they learn how to read genuine worthwhile friendly approaches, versus predatory unwanted approaches. Spot your friends with that skill, and then try to learn from them?

The friends I know that have the skill end up meeting worthwhile people in most any situation they are in; even in predatory environments.

Location makes some difference, of course. I have travelled a lot, and some countries or towns everybody is trying to grift, while other places everyone is genuinely open and friendly. Or pubs where everyone is welcoming without pressure, versus other pubs where everyone is trying to use or scam you. Your own context makes a difference: if you are with dogs or kids, more people will default to thinking you are okay (modulo other cues) etcetera.

Disclaimer: I’m not great at the above, but I try to learn to improve. The friends I know who are great at the above get awesome opportunities - they also tend to be good people themselves. It is like a secret split in society where kind people recognise each other via unobvious protocols. If you don’t know the protocols, then you end up grouped with users and grifters, which is self-reinforcing and hard to change.

Man that’s a depressing state of affairs.

...Absolutely?

When we get unsolicited communication over phone, text, email, IM, etc., we consider it spam. It's almost always someone trying to get you to give money to them or their interest group.

As someone who spends most of their day online, it's not hard at all to see why I might start thinking that way about in-person communication from people I don't know.

This might be a regional/cultural difference. In my city in a flyover state, any stranger who tries to talk to you beyond small talk is almost certainly going to try to sell you something. (Obviously, outside of socialization contexts such as bars, clubs, meetups, etc)

On the internet I would be even more wary, as anonymity or pseudo anonymity allows degenerates you would normally never interact with to grace your life with their presence.

Some of the people I have met online make the two wackos the author met look like saints in comparison.

Nice try cultist!

Not necessarily. Introverts are content to stick to the friends they already have, and/or just being alone. There's less stress that way.

It depends on context. If I meet someone because of a common interest or thing we are doing (we are at the gym, I recognize them as a regular, and say hi, or whatever) then yes I'll have some light conversation.

A totally random person walking up to me and starting to talk? No, that's weird and I'm immediately at yellow alert at minimum, if not searching for the nearest exit.

Most people live miserable lives, especially in this day and age. Occasionally there are moments of joy, but they are fleeting.

If that's really true, I'm even more privileged than I realize. I'm rarely miserable. I thought that was pretty normal.

To be fair, rarely do people have an accurate grasp on what normality is. Just the breadth of human experience is impossible to capture much less experience and process, not to mention the experience of people that is never expressed (I may be having a bad week, but I wouldn't express it, much less share it openly with coworkers)

> To be fair, rarely do people have an accurate grasp on what normality is.

Well said. I’ve been thinking about this idea for a very long time. Like another user said above, the negativity bias has a large role to play here. I live in a small town and talking with strangers is considered normal and healthy.

Maybe this is false nostalgia, but I feel like this is more true post smartphones than pre-smartphones. More people will just pop out their phones and check their messages/mail/play a game rather than talk to people around them; a fair amount of casual interactions were bored people stuck waiting in the same place.

This is a bad assumption. I often do this because I’m an extrovert and find other people interesting/fascinating, but want nothing from you and, to my knowledge, am not mentally unstable. :)

To be fair, I don’t lead with “have you ever done therapy?” or “what does it mean to be alive?” haha

For me it depends on what kind of conversation it is. I'll gladly exchange pleasantries with strangers and even have brief conversations when it's clear what the boundaries are--for example, someone in line behind me at the supermarket, where it's understood that as soon as I've checked out, I'm leaving.

Where I draw the line is when strangers try to push a conversation beyond clear boundaries, or try to push a conversation in a situation where the boundaries aren't clear and they can try to manipulate them. That's what would have put me off in the "First Contact" episode in the article.

For me it probably also helps that I'm an introvert and I have no problem just ending a conversation and going back to whatever I was doing. For example, at the point where the woman started asking follow-up questions, I would have said something like "I'm not really familiar with those places, sorry", and gone back to what I was doing.

In the U.S., its part of their culture that striking up a conversation with a total stranger is normal. It just looks weird to the rest of the world, but I think it works out in their favor.

This has been my observation as well, and this is why I look at compliments with great cynicism, and why I do not give compliments or strike up conversations. And if I do want something from someone, I state those intentions early so they don’t think my conversation is a ruse.

>This has been my observation as well, and this is why I look at compliments with great cynicism, and why I do not give compliments or strike up conversations. And if I do want something from someone, I state those intentions early so they don’t think my conversation is a ruse.

Please don't take this as a jab at you as it certainly isn't intended to be.

That said, you express a really transactional view of human interactions. That seems to be a sad way to view the rest of your fellow humans.

Transactional interactions are a normal part of life but, at least for me, I will interact with people, including strangers, because I like interacting with people, not because I want something from them.

Obviously, when transacting with a cashier, a shopkeeper, a waiter, etc. it's transactional.

But in other circumstances, and even sometimes in those circumstances (if that's not inconveniencing them) I will engage others without any expectations or intent to manipulate or use those folks.

Sure, there are folks out there who will engage with you because they want something from you. In my experience, however (and I've lived most of my life in NYC and travelled quite a bit around the US and less around the world) most people are decent, kind people who aren't out to get something from you or trying to scam you.

Today I said “beautiful day out” to some guy who looked maybe homeless. He immediately offered me a beer, which was nice, but I declined as I had 4 kids to watch at the beach.

It turned out we went to the same college (Berkeley) and he graduated a year before I started. He was on the football team and knew my old roommate, who was also on the team.

He definitely was a bit weird. Visiting SF from Alaska after his wife’s death, but totally friendly and not creepy. Interesting enough that I felt like I had a story to tell without being creeped out. It’s been a long two years, and I missed these sorts of small interactions with people very different than me.

> My assumption based on experience is that any stranger who strikes up a conversation with me is either mentally unstable or is looking to get something from me.

I operate under this assumption any time I'm somewhere in a big city, unless I'm attending an event where people are specifically mixed together and expected to talk to each other (professional conference, etc)

in a small town of 200-300 people/very rural area, I take a different approach of course

> in a small town of 200-300 people/very rural area, I take a different approach of course

Hell, in a town that size, you know the mentally unstable folks and might even enjoy chatting with (some of) them if you see 'em at the feed store.

What a remarkably unhealthy perspective. Yet engaged in communication here. My first thought was you must be American, but that could just as easily be quite a number of places and cultures across continents. In Israel personal boundaries are quite different and it's common to engage those around you in conversation. I wouldn't correlate mental stability with social norms--frankly I associate health with social engagement, so the opposite.

This is why I find it hard to just strike up a conversation, even at a conference. I’ve always admired people who can.

At a party, it’s no problem.

Or they're trying to get me to use Javascript.

How would you rate your social intuition? I would rate mine as moderate, undermined by anxious traits, but it's typically pretty obvious when someone is unstable/potentially dangerous or panhandling. I live in a major US metro and somewhat routinely talk briefly with people I encounter in a low-stakes way.

Or it might be just a typical American. in Europe they are rare, but over in the states or on airports you are constantly small-talked about nothing. And then you can easily torpedo this small talk by actually being honest. that's what they are not used to at all.

I got a new job and now I have to take the lift up to my office. I regularly take the lift and have at least once a day some random chat for the duration of the lift tour.

Not all strangers are that bad and(but?) this is Germany!

it's so unfortunate. I am an immigrant that left my birth country quite young, but I still remember couple of good friends. Out of around 7 friends whom I remembered their name and details enough that I later track them down online, only 1 replied, the rest all said they've been burnt heaps through the years by scammers etc. And that was it.

I pepper spray anyone who makes eye contact. So far, 100% success rate on not being recruited into a cult or MLM scheme.

If you mean that I'm bored and want to kill time by having a conversation with a stranger, then you got me.