It's under a paywall for some, so here's the archived version.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 32 points 1 year ago (74 children)

Its a call to be present.

There is nothing inherently wrong with wearing headphones on the train, but ask yourself why you're doing it.

If you put on Headphones to keep people from talking to you, you're making the choice to opt out of the human experience.?Make that choice every day on a 45 minute commute and after only a week 7.5 hours where you've opted out of chance encounter, conversation, possibly meeting a new friend or partner. It might not be a bad idea to make the choice to NOT disconnect, actively choosing to engage in the world around us makes a huge difference in how we percieve it, and how it percieves us.

An experiment I'd suggest, if you're the type to default to using your phone as an idle activity:

Next time you're idle and get the urge to pull out your phone, instead look around you and find the most interesting thing you can see. Why is it interesting? Is there anything abnormal about it? Is it's place significant? Take that and note it in your mind, have a conversation with a coworker about it later. Then take note, how did this pointless conversation make me feel?

Being present by choice, especially if done often, will create chances to engage with the World, and its inhabitants.

The other day someone told me life was boring. Put the phone down, make more than the 2 meter cone you can see from around your phone visible, and you'll find the World has a lot of engagement to offer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 74 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Great if your culture encourages that I guess? I do that in East Asia and I'll get weird stares from everyone. And they'll ask you to mind your own business which, I agree. It's basic respect here to not talk on the train.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (72 children)

    I don't any randos talking to me on the train. Commute is worse enough without people trying to "connect with me" during it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 72 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (66 children)

    Lots of research shows that random social interactions are far more enjoyable than people expect them to be.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-social-explorer/202502/if-socializing-is-so-good-for-us-why-do-we-avoid-it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 66 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (59 children)

    It's like 90% drunk homeless people that talk to you on trains and buses though. It gets tiring.

    If I want chance encounters with sober people, I'll go to the bar. I mean eventually the people there get drunk too, but it's a nice "5 hours and 10 beers" drunk not "what month and/or year is it" drunk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 59 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (58 children)

    I’m the guy who takes a shot at a random conversation on the plane.

    Doesn’t often turn into anything, but sometimes it’s a nice little glimpse into humanity.

    Guess I don’t know what trains you’re on that are so full of the drunk and homeless, but that sounds like a problem in its own right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 58 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I once took an overnight flight from the west coast to the east coast. The flight wasn't very crowded and I intentionally picked a seat away from other ocupied seats.

    I get on the plane, as I'm warking back to my seat I notice there's entire rows that are empty. So instead of picking a seat in an open row, and this. fucking. guy. picked the window seat closest to my aisle seat, and he talked for most of the flight. In hindsight I should have just sat somewhere else when I first noticed him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (47 children)

    On a plane? That's much worse, you can't just change seats or get out if you want to avoid the person. Oh god

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (28 children)

    I like to think of it as giving people an opening.

    Make a comment or two that invites discussion. If it takes, great. Maybe chat for a minute, maybe for a while.

    If not, oh well, better luck next time.

    Wo is interested and who is not is extremely easy to discern, in my opinion. The fact that you clearly think otherwise is not surprising, but I do think it’s easier than you give it credit for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (27 children)

    A lot of people pretend so as not to seem rude. Also you never know how the other person will react otherwise.

    I know you find enjoyment in it, I'm just saying that planes and such places where people are stuck with you are pretty risky.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (26 children)

    And I will respectfully point out that you seem to be arguing entirely from vibes and anecdotes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (25 children)

    You agreed that you never know how the situation goes. And I'm guessing we agree that people are stuck in planes. So why risk it, if you're going to potentially be making the situation suck for the other person, I'm wondering

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (24 children)

    why risk it?

    Because there’s almost no risk involved.

    So why risk it, if you're going to potentially be making the situation suck for the other person, I'm wondering

    Answers to this question, and more, are provided in some of the links provided.

    The chances of making “the situation suck” are exceedingly small. The chances it “goes well” are quite high. A couple friendly words between strangers. A story to tell later.

    Of particular note

    His curiosity led to a series of experimentsrevealing that train and bus commuters who interacted with other passengers experienced a more pleasant ride — even when they believed they would prefer the solitude of, say, reading a book.

    It is fear that the person sitting next to us won't enjoy talking to us that makes us keep to ourselves, Epley found. But when we do talk to each other, those social interactions with strangers tend to be both less awkward and more enjoyable than most people predict.

    You seem to completely discount this possibility, while simultaneously overblowing the risk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (23 children)

    It just seems a bit selfish to try and "connect" in a sotuation where they can't leave. I get that it is your thing but at least on a plane it would be bettee to just chill for the duration of it. After all nothing negative about that, they might try to connect with you if they're up for it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (22 children)

    There may be a selfish component to it. Doesn’t make it a selfish act.

    I get that it’s your thing

    It’s my thing after I read a few of these papers (you can find the links, and read them if you like, they’re in my other comments) and started giving it a shot.

    it would be bettee to just chill for the duration of it.

    Yes, you have made it very clear that for you, you believe that this is the case.

    The data show that a lot of people feel this way before they try it, but are pleasantly surprised after.

    After all nothing negative about that, they might try to connect with you if they're up for it

    Nothing negative about what? “Being chill?” I think you’ll find that I’m pretty chill.

    You seem to think I’m nagging them for the duration, but as I’ve explained, it’s really more of creating an opening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (21 children)

    You won't cause anything negative by just chilling during the flight. Meanwhile, by trying to connect, you might make someone's travel worse. So if you value the fellow passengers, best move is not to risk it, at least not on the plane. Otherwise you're just gambling with their mood, which seems a bit shitty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (20 children)

    So if you value the fellow passengers, best move is not to risk it

    There’s a lot of big assumptions built into how you think about risk if the only possible outcomes you can conceive of are negative.

    at least not on the plane

    Oh yes the plane. Because of the implication, right?

    I just feel bad that your outlook is so sad for all of this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (19 children)

    Well you won't negatively affect them by not interacting with them. They are still free to talk to you, after all. The implication is a good one because they don't know what sort of creep or angry person you might be and how you would react to rejection. You're almost insisting on talking to the people on a situation you know might negatively affect them and where they are stuck in the situation and that just seems odd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (18 children)

    I feel like you’re just reiterating your last comment as though you didn’t read mine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (17 children)

    You havent really addressed it propeely imo. I just don't understand the mindset.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (16 children)

    Would you care to address any of the articles with research and numbers that I claim back me up?

    I see you don’t understand the mindset. I don’t believe you are trying to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (15 children)

    I don't get how the articles "back you up" in this point

    You're almost insisting on talking to the people on a situation you know might negatively affect them and where they are stuck in the situation and that just seems odd.

    What do the articles have to do with that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (14 children)

    That’s because you haven’t read them.

    They have to do with the positive outcomes, which you continue to ignore, or treat as inconsequential.

    A small chance of a negative outcome does not generally outweigh a good chance of a positive outcome.

    youre almost insisting on talking

    You insist on mischaracterizing my position. Asking somebody a question ir two is hardly as insisant as you keep making it out to be.

    and that just seems odd

    To you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (13 children)

    So you're just gambling on their feelings, did I understand that correctly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (12 children)

    I suppose so.

    And you have no notion about gambling theory or risk reward whatsoever? Am I inferring that correctly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (11 children)

    I don't want to make anyone's day worse. Gambling on someone else's feelings just seems icky to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)

    That’s because you ignore the possibility of a good thing happening, and/ or dramatically overstate the risks of it making somebody’s day worse.

    Let’s start with a silly example. Let’s say you had $1000 in your favorite currency. It was given to you with the purpose of you giving it to somebody else. If you do not give it to them, the money disappears.

    Would you give this money away? What if I told you there was a 1% chance that it would make a persons day worse?

    If you’re not giving the money away, then at least you’re consistent, I’ll give you that.

    If you are, what about $100? What about 10$?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    I'm not ignoring possibility of good things. I just don't think it's worth gambling that there's a negative outcome. If you don't do anything it won't cause anything negative and they're still free ro talk to you. I just wouldn't want to risk causing someones day to be shittier because I wanted to gamble.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

    So you won’t even engage with my silly hypothetical?

    If you don’t think that any amount of “gambling” is worth even the smallest amount of risk, regardless of the possible reward, then I think you are arguing from an indefensible position.

    if you don’t do anything it won’t cause anything negative and they’re still free eo talk to you

    Are they? They’re not bound be the same constraints as I should be? It’s a risk they should be willing to take?

    I just wouldn't want to risk causing someones day to be shittier because I wanted to gamble.

    You’re mischaracterizing things again. I never said I was doing this “because I wanted to gamble.” I’m doing this because I believe that the chances are quite good at having a positive outcome for both me, and the person I’m interacting with. I additionally believe that the chances of a negative outcome are exceptionally low.

    You seem to think that both the odds and the severity of a bad outcome are so serious, that the positive outcomes shouldn’t even be considered. Despite a solid day of this conversation, you have only vaguely pointed in the direction of what these bad outcomes look like, or how likely you think they are.

    I can infer that you believe it to be extremely likely and extremely serious. I can point back at some of the data which interestingly seems to have failed to capture such a scenario, but it’s still not clear to me that you’ve bothered to read any of the links with studies I’ve provided.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

    It's like gambling on someone else's money. You could do nothing and the situation stays the same, or you could run the risk of losing their money. You feel the odds are good so you go for it, I would feel shit about losing their money just because I wanted to gamble so I don't do it. And they can gamble on their own too if they want to, it's not like by not gambling on their behalf you're preventing them from gambling.

    I never said I was doing this “because I wanted to gamble.” I’m doing this because I believe that the chances are quite good at having a positive outcome for both me, and the person I’m interacting with. I additionally believe that the chances of a negative outcome are exceptionally low.

    You're describing gambling...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (6 children)

    I would feel shit about losing their money just because I wanted to gamble so I don't do it.

    You would feel like shit if you lost somebody a dollar? How about one cent? Even if there was a 1/1000 chance? Even if they stood to win life changing money on the other 999/1000? Do you think they would be upset?

    Is no amount of loss worth any amount of win? If that’s your position, then how do you even get up in the morning? Why is this situation so different at the bar? Likelihood of things going badly in a bar are far far higher in my estimation.

    you’re describing gambling

    I’m describing basically every choice you ever have to make in terms of gambling, yes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    I wouldn't gamble on someone else's money since it is not my money to gamble on. It should be up to them imo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Ok then how about it’s no money, but they have to hear about how they didn’t get the money, and so they feel kinda bummed out, if they don’t win.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    But that's not how it would go in a situation where you just don't make conversation. Or are you thinking they really want to have a conversation with you and are just thinking "oh gosh I'm so bummed that random person didn't talk to me"? I don't understand

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Your position seems to be that there is no risk so small that it wouldn’t override a potential win.

    I am trying to point out the absurdity of this position.

    If you can’t see the absurdity of this position, even with the silly parameters on it, then I’ll just ask this direct question:

    How do you justify ever talking to a stranger? Surely the risk of a negative outcome is just too great, because there will always be some risk.

    If this is not your position; state your position in similar terms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I generally don't chitchat with strangers. It doesn't cost anything in that situation not to talk, there's no negative to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    generally don't chitchat with strangers.

    Except on the internet.

    It doesn't cost anything in that situation not to talk, there's no negative to it.

    There is opportunity cost.

    But just to be clear, your position is “don’t be the first one talking if talking to strangers, unless absolutely necessary, it’s too risky.”?

    If this is not your position, please state it again, because this is how I read the comment I’m replying to.

    In either case, please state what you think “the negative” that you are risking, or risking for a person on their behalf.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (17 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It's not that the trains are so full of drunk homeless people, but that trains are affordable and also conductors aren't going to physically throw out a person that could get violent. Planes you don't really get on without a ticket. An entire class of people are filtered off the plane because of that.

    And anyway, said group are a minority, but they're the only ones who randomly talk to strangers most of the time. Everyone else minds their own business in my experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    the [drunk & homeless are the] only ones who randomly talk to strangers most of the time

    I’m not going to question your experience too much, but it’s sad to me that this would be true.

    A random conversation in a random interaction with somebody you could have easily not talked to can be great fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I would argue that a large chunk of the people you describe above are not “trying to think about things”, they’re just trying to get to point B. They’ve got a goal, after all.

    This might be a me thing. I am never not thinking, planning, solving problems. My brain doesn't do idle very easily.

    People on the bus or train are just people.

    You're from a different culture probably. Literally, most people don't want unsolicited interactions where I'm from. If someone's approaching you to start a conversation out of the blue, they're going to be asking you for booze or cigarettes. Or money. Or they already got their booze and now they're making small talk. And for 50% of the population, the other 50% of the population can be seen as threatening based on gender alone. So it's polite to just shut up and let other people be. You gotta have a reason for talking to people who aren't expecting to be talked to. Not bothering anyone is part of our culture. You don't go to the ER unless there's an axe in your skull, because going there just because you're only MILDLY dying, would be bothering the doctors and nurses and all in all just too much of a fuss.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Literally, most people don't want unsolicited interactions where I'm from

    You’ve talked a lot about this with others I take it? Got good data to work with?

    If someone's approaching you to start a conversation out of the blue, they're going to be asking you for booze or cigarettes. Or money. Or they already got their booze and now they're making small talk. And for 50% of the population, the other 50% of the population can be seen as threatening based on gender alone.

    These percentages do make your vibes and intuition much more convincing.

    So it's polite to just shut up and let other people be.

    It’s not impolite, sure.

    You gotta have a reason for talking to people who aren't expecting to be talked to.

    I do have a reason. You just don’t personally like it, except for the other times when you choose it. You’ve convinced yourself that I must want something, so stranger danger bad.

    Not bothering anyone is part of our culture.

    Which culture is this? How is “bothering” defined? You seem to be acting like eye contact and a smile means I’m after your money

    You assume I’m bothering people. I assert that I don’t believe it to be true. My point of view had some evidence, which I have linked throughout these comments. Yours are stated as fact despite clearly just being your vibes.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I expect it not to happen and hope it stays that way since. Please jusr don't bother me while I'm on the train

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm the person on public transit

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They're random people I most likely have never seen before and probably won't ever see again. I live in the city, not a small town where everyone knows each other. The idea of trying to connect with the poor sobs who ended up in the same train as me sounds both crazy and draining as fuck. Not the least bit because where I live, most people cherish that moment to themselves and you'd be fucking that up and bothering them.

    If I was commuting with the same four people every day I'd be more likely to talk to them but not in a full ass train with random people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)