Not naming numbers is precisely the point, because you obfuscate the reality of the size of the gap, which in the end is what everything ...
Not naming numbers is precisely the point, because you obfuscate the reality of the size of the gap, which in the end is what everything is about. The gap creates the offense. Everybody knows there's rich people, but being confronted by exactly how rich, to the detail of a number, is the offensive part (if done by that rich person without any clear reason). I'm not sure why people keep piling up to pretend this is such a normal thing, this is literally why people don't discuss salaries despite it technically being in their own interest: specifics ground the fuzzy notion of inequality into reality like nothing else. The offensive post inflates the perceived inequality from "500$ pants is too much for pants" to "10k means nothing to me" while my version leaves the specifics outside of the conversation. In my version, the person could put the level of "too expensive for pants" at 1k, still an order of magnitude lower than the offensive post. Finally, I acknowledge that this is a privileged position to be in explicitly, because that signals that you are aware that this is an exceptional situation to be in (which I'm not sure the offensive post author is aware of, even now).
Posted by vouwfietsman on Nov 14, 2025, 4:38 PM
Tags
Related issues
- Fake websites pretending to be legitimate websites in order to steal your passwords was considered a HUGE problem.
- 3.5 Flash was always too expensive for a "flash" model.
- I don't think the realistic alternative here was “hire a team for a month and get a better semantic conversion” For a rewrite of this si...
- I was hosting on a PC at home like 10 years ago.
- I live in walking distance of all these things, and the farthest I’ve gotten my kid to do things alone is to walk to and from school (a w...
- It was a long time ago, so I don't remember.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.2,000 issues0 comments
pricing (E-commerce)
Fake websites pretending to be legitimate websites in order to steal your passwords was considered a HUGE problem.
3.5 Flash was always too expensive for a "flash" model.
I don't think the realistic alternative here was “hire a team for a month and get a better semantic conversion” For a rewrite of this si...
I was hosting on a PC at home like 10 years ago.
I live in walking distance of all these things, and the farthest I’ve gotten my kid to do things alone is to walk to and from school (a w...
It was a long time ago, so I don't remember.
I still like to buy my cheap and esoteric Chinese stuff from Amazon.
My local area used to be great to find old used woodworking tools for cheap.
Not naming numbers is precisely the point, because you obfuscate the reality of the size of the gap, which in the end is what everything ...
Not naming numbers is precisely the point, because you obfuscate the reality of the size of the gap, which in the end is what everything is about. The gap creates the offense. Everybody knows there's rich people, but being confronted by exactly how rich, to the detail of a number, is the offensive part (if done by that rich person without any clear reason). I'm not sure why people keep piling up to pretend this is such a normal thing, this is literally why people don't discuss salaries despite it technically being in their own interest: specifics ground the fuzzy notion of inequality into reality like nothing else. The offensive post inflates the perceived inequality from "500$ pants is too much for pants" to "10k means nothing to me" while my version leaves the specifics outside of the conversation. In my version, the person could put the level of "too expensive for pants" at 1k, still an order of magnitude lower than the offensive post. Finally, I acknowledge that this is a privileged position to be in explicitly, because that signals that you are aware that this is an exceptional situation to be in (which I'm not sure the offensive post author is aware of, even now).
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.