←back to thread

Are we the baddies?

(geohot.github.io)
697 points AndrewSwift | 7 comments | 06 Jul 25 05:36 UTC | HN request time: 0.876s | source | bottom
Show context
ggm ◴[06 Jul 25 06:09 UTC] No.44478235[source]▶
For some people, paying the premium to jump the queue is the point. What they didn't forsee is what happens when everyone has wound up paying the premium, and the queue is now with you again. This is mostly Australian frequent flyers, when it was a high barrier to entry it conferred advantages and now Fly in Fly out work has commoditised club status, there is next to no boarding advantage, and no points flight availability.

So yes. Status seeking, and differential price seeking probably is a-social as a pattern when it's weaponised against the consumer.

That said, I hated Uber, they actually offered to underwrite people breaking the law to get foot in the door (how that didn't get them excluded as a corporate scofflaw is beyond me) and they continue to export all the profits offshore, but taxi services had become shit and now we have got used to Uber and I just don't worry about surge pricing. I got boiled slowly.

My fellow Australians all feel a bit shit about the introduction of tipping in paywave and food service. That's unaustralian. We have legally enforced minimum wages and penalty rates. Turn that feature off.

The European push to mandate included luggage in flight is seeing a fair bit of trolling. So there are still true believers who think needing clean underwear is weak.

replies(16): >>44478304 #>>44478436 #>>44478619 #>>44478738 #>>44478946 #>>44478989 #>>44479057 #>>44479127 #>>44479393 #>>44479945 #>>44480176 #>>44480295 #>>44480476 #>>44480794 #>>44481108 #>>44486878 #
rr808 ◴[06 Jul 25 11:56 UTC] No.44479945[source]▶
> My fellow Australians all feel a bit shit about the introduction of tipping in paywave and food service. That's unaustralian. We have legally enforced minimum wages and penalty rates. Turn that feature off.

I think non-Americans need to take a stand against this. Refuse all tipping. Its a slippery slope - I know these guys are underpaid but if you start tipping the wages will just drop and we're all worse off.

replies(8): >>44480017 #>>44480140 #>>44480275 #>>44481408 #>>44481977 #>>44482799 #>>44482839 #>>44485751 #
chrsw ◴[06 Jul 25 16:14 UTC] No.44481977[source]▶
I'm American.

This is how capitalism is supposed to work. It's supposed to seep into every crevice of society and pull money out of the poorest, weakest people and into the hands of the richest and strongest. This isn't a coincidence, it is in fact the most important aspect of the system.

Tipping went from some generous gesture to recognize exceptional service and it's turned into a mandatory, arm-twisting shakedown by businesses that simply do not want to pay their employees. Not just avoid paying a living wage (those days are long gone) but not even a _minimum_ wage. Many people involved in or invested in the restaurant businesses wouldn't have thought about getting in if they had to pay employees for an honest day's work.

Many restaurants these days aren't just local mom and pop family run businesses but large corporations who own many franchises and operate in the billions of dollars yet people like you and I are expected to pay most of the wages of the servers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darden_Restaurants

Sure, you can never eat out or only eat at locally owned small businesses. But that's just one small slice of society. The only realistic solution for many of us is to try to run the rat race faster.

replies(4): >>44482606 #>>44482853 #>>44483952 #>>44495635 #
southernplaces7 ◴[06 Jul 25 18:16 UTC] No.44482853[source]▶
Just don't tip automatically, toughen up a little on the frowning looks and remind yourself that for one thing, you're not defrauding anyone for not tipping as an automatic thing, and secondly, its the cynical shits in the finacial incentive structure above your waiter who are really at fault.
replies(1): >>44483200 #
const_cast ◴[06 Jul 25 19:12 UTC] No.44483200[source]▶
This sounds good and like a protest but it's not because:

1. You're not hurting the big wigs who exploit workers. They don't care if you don't tip.

2. You ARE hurting the underpaid, exploited worker.

replies(2): >>44483497 #>>44484142 #
southernplaces7 ◴[06 Jul 25 21:19 UTC] No.44484142[source]▶
> You ARE hurting the underpaid, exploited worker.

What? No, you're not hurting anyone. You're going out to eat and expecting to pay for what you ordered, not the life subsidy of someone whose employer can't be bothered to pay them well enough. Either way, it's not and shouldn't be your obligation even if it does screw with the waiter's finances. I too might have financial squeezes that make it difficult for me to fork over an extra 14 to 20% every damn time I've already paid for all that I bought.

Your claim just keeps reinforcing the foolish notion that it's a consumer's fault/responsibility if wait staff aren't paid enough by their employers.

>You're not hurting the big wigs who exploit workers. They don't care if you don't tip.

And I shouldn't have to care if they don't care. At bottom, like I said in my point above, it's not my job to subsidize their wages either way. I didn't make my argument as a description of protest, instead i'm saying it as a practical thing anyone should and has a right to do.

replies(1): >>44484937 #
1. const_cast ◴[06 Jul 25 23:03 UTC] No.44484937[source]▶
> What? No, you're not hurting anyone.

You are, and it's objective.

Does this worker have more, or less, money than before? It's not a matter of opinion. The answer is less, and we know that's the answer because that's specifically what you're seeking out.

What you're arguing is if this harm is justified. Maybe, maybe not. In your opinion, it is. My opinion is that the marginal effects of me not tipping will have zero impact on the culture, so, for now, I play by the rules. The rules are stupid, I agree, but I still play by them.

replies(3): >>44487049 #>>44487066 #>>44488600 #
2. imperfect_blue ◴[07 Jul 25 05:28 UTC] No.44487049[source]▶
You're hurting yourself when you tip.

You have, objectively, less money than before. Ergo, tipping is self-harm.

replies(1): >>44497272 #
3. southernplaces7 ◴[07 Jul 25 05:30 UTC] No.44487066[source]▶
No, you're bloody well not. You as an average external consumer did not create the exploitative culture of low wages for hospitality staff or make any one of them join that culture by seeking employment there. There's nothing objective about what you argue except that it's objectively mistaken in its blame.

Playing by stupid "rules" (which these aren't in any case, they're social tendencies that can be slowly changed) is the passively damaging thing, a logic of, "yeah, this aspect of the world is shit but i'll chide you for not participating in it because I myself am too inert to not do so".

>Does this worker have more, or less, money than before? It's not a matter of opinion. The answer is less, and we know that's the answer because that's specifically what you're seeking out.

Do you own a restaurant in which you underpay employees? I'd almost guess you do to come up with such topsy-turvy nonsense. The worker having less money has nothing to do with any fault of your own. You're paying for what you ordered, and stealing nothing from anyone; you're simply seeking not to be squeezed further for no good reason. The owner of the place is however literally underpaying because they're hoping to guilt you into subsidizing part of wages, and convincing their employees that this is the correct thing.

A person having less money because you refuse to participate in a subtle bit of exploitation doesn't make you guilty of the exploitation or "seeking it out"

replies(1): >>44497293 #
4. account42 ◴[07 Jul 25 10:05 UTC] No.44488600[source]▶
You're hurting me right now by not tipping me for this comment. I expect at least $100 in order to not feel hurt.
replies(1): >>44497265 #
5. const_cast ◴[08 Jul 25 05:07 UTC] No.44497265[source]▶
You're correct, you are more hurt than if I gave you 100 dollars. Duh, this is obvious.

Consider the negation: you’re not hurt if I give you 100 dollars. Or, rephrased, you're better off if I give you 100 dollars. Is this true? Yes. If I queried all 7.5 billion people on Earth, they’d all say yes.

Again, the tricky part is I don't care. That's a different thing.

6. const_cast ◴[08 Jul 25 05:08 UTC] No.44497272[source]▶
Yes, it is, that's exactly what it is and it's not up for debate.

Like I said, the rules are stupid but, for now, I play by them.

You might as "why are you hurting yourself?". Because I can afford to hurt myself, the waiter probably can't. 5 bucks is a drop in the bucket for me, but, presumably, not for them.

And, on the topic of self-harm, we all make decisions every day that harm us. We sometimes get something in return, but often we don’t. We do it purely for the benefit of other people, often people we don’t know and will never see again.

Consider holding a door open. For me, I get in the building 10 seconds later. That’s worse than getting in the door 10 seconds earlier. What did I gain? Nothing. Some stranger got 100% of the benefit, with nothing for me.

7. const_cast ◴[08 Jul 25 05:12 UTC] No.44497293[source]▶
It's not topsy-turvy at all, it's very simple and straightforward logic.

Again: does the worker have less, or more, money than before if you don't tip? It's not a trick question, it's not a rhetorical question, it's a very simple question.

Okay... they have less. So, the worker is worse off when you don't tip. Again, what you're arguing is that's okay and justified. Which is fine, and lots of people will agree.

> The worker having less money has nothing to do with any fault of your own.

This is blatantly not true.

When you don't tip 5 dollars, the waiter does not have 5 dollars. Who did not give them that 5 dollars? You.

You're arguing that isn't your responsibility. That's a different argument. But who didn't give it to them? You.

> The owner of the place is however literally underpaying because they're hoping to guilt you into subsidizing part of wages, and convincing their employees that this is the correct thing.

Correct, this is exactly right. And, I agree with you: this is absolutely what is happening. I want this to end 100%.

But, in my opinion, I do not believe, personally, for me, in my life, that I will be enacting any change or furthering this cause in any way by not tipping. So, for me, I tip.

If you do not want to tip, I think that's fine. Go for it. What you cannot claim is that this doesn't hurt your particular waiter. Obviously it does, you made his night a little bit worse. If you still don't believe me, just ask next time, the waiter will tell you.

And, notice my wording here, it’s very careful. That particular waiter is worse off. It’s possible to help waiters, as a group, as a collective, while simultaneously harming that particular waiter. You believe you’re deconstructing or undermining tipping as a system, ergo helping waiters as a whole. But in the process, you’re hurting that particular waiter.