Shamelessness as a strategy (2019)
64 comments
·August 18, 2025aanet
This is perhaps the best articulation on the rise of certain cantankerous people... in social media / politics / <everywhere>
The metaphor of the game is a good one for general understanding (though the Signaling / Counters-signaling paper is a TIL for me)
I was hoping that there would be a "solution" of sorts to tackle / handle this issue of when EVERYBODY seems to use this strategy, but perhaps there isn't one...?
(My own way of dealing with this is to, uh, not read / watch any news / social media... but such ways are quite brittle, of course)
lovich
> I was hoping that there would be a "solution" of sorts to tackle / handle this issue of when EVERYBODY seems to use this strategy, but perhaps there isn't one...?
It’s called government regulation. There’s whole fields of research on how to solve an arbitrarily complicated Prisoner’s Dilemma. A lot of people are allergic to the idea because they don’t want to have limits on their behavior, only on others or on no one at all.
So we get everyone picking the bad square in the Dilemma
johnnyanmac
>A lot of people are allergic to the idea because they don’t want to have limits on their behavior, only on others or on no one at all.
So are we doomed? if we don't vote in people who can properly regulate this, it seems the dilemma continues. But how does one convince an entire society to stop being so selfish and myopic?
lovich
If you want everyone to be able to do what they want without limit, and enough people are choosing a route to destruction, then yes we are doomed.
I have no idea how to convince anyone anymore. Even people who claim to care about things beyond themself immediately round up the wagons the second they have a limitation imposed. Already in this thread there’s someone mocking government regulation with a strawman argument. I’d just find some people you can make a community with and hole up.
The Curtis Yavins, Thiels, and Musks of the world appear to have willed their post democracy state into existence without how much anti democratic sentiment they pull. Gonna have to figure out what their “post constitutional” world is going to look like before anyone has any idea what a good oath forward will be
b_e_n_t_o_n
Government regulation of shameful behaviour? That's worked out wonderfully in the past.
lovich
European governments have regulations for anti social behaviors that curb some excesses and they haven’t collapsed. So I would agree, they have worked in the past
mmaunder
A return to formality is the antidote, I’m afraid. As austere and priggish as it may seem. You may see brands and influencers emerging that gain traction with a kind of 1950s post WWII flavor of seriousness and formality. I’m not suggesting social conservatives. More the presentation and packaging of ideas and their purveyors. Formal instead of slovenly, polite vs obnoxious, eloquent vs simplistic, cultured vs vulgar, intellect vs spectacle.
PessimalDecimal
The US isn't that society anymore. My brief trips to Japan and Switzerland suggests they may still be in some ways. But the US is fundamentally demotic and geared towards the lowest common denominator in nearly all aspects of life. Any attempt to reverse that will be a long and slow process, likely doomed to failure.
nickpinkston
I kind of agree with Nadia's analysis of what's happening, but it's a fucking cursed reality.
Here's hoping for a New New Sincerity to bring us back.
lowwave
All for Post-postmodernism!!!
nickpinkston
Have you seen Metamodernism?
There's an art scene and political movement:
Art (mostly): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamodernism
Movement: https://metamoderna.org/metamodernism/
rogerkirkness
It's hard to unsee metamodern in movies once you see it. I did a 'self aware waldo' monologue in high school drama class, didn't realize it was meta modern.
b_e_n_t_o_n
It's not shamelessness, it's authenticity. In today's curated, hyperreal society people desperately crave imperfections, cracks in the armour, they want something real, something human. They desire vulnerability, in part because it gives them courage to also be vulnerable, to not be afraid of judgement and rejection, and the freedom to be themselves.
And I think it's actionable advice for all of us. Be genuine, be vulnerable, and don't be afraid to be your true self. People like that.
dkarl
It's a very specific form of authenticity. It's the authenticity of people who don't make an effort, who don't feel any need to try, who know that people are going to accept them and look up to them no matter how shitty they are.
But for regular people it's a fantasy. Because it only works if you're rich.
b_e_n_t_o_n
That isn't true in my experience. Authenticity doesn't require wealth in order to land.
SeanSullivan86
Senior management doesn't like it, in my experience. But I agree it makes sense for many interactions.
mmaunder
The legal fiction that is the corporation is the antithesis of authenticity, and the brand they invest so heavily in, its mask. Having an authentic employee risks removing the mask.
apical_dendrite
No, it's shamelessness.
Shame exists to keep us from engaging in antisocial behavior.
If your true self is a liar, a cheat, a cruel person, then you should absolutely be afraid to be your true self.
b_e_n_t_o_n
That's still authenticity though. What's not authentic is people who conceal those aspects of themselves, and it's also far more dangerous.
dang
Related. Others?
Shamelessness as a strategy (2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32233451 - July 2022 (214 comments)
Shamelessness as a Strategy (2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25591066 - Dec 2020 (213 comments)
socalgal2
The latest South Park (Season 27, Episode 2) seems to be related or tangentially related
A student is on social media saying things that upset people solely to make money
glenstein
>It’s important to note that people were dismissive of Paris because validating her playbook would mean admitting that they were playing an inferior game. Everyone else had invested years into optimizing for the most legible version of the rules. They’d look silly if they were to admit she had found a better way of doing things.
I had a co-worker who was addicted to verbally correcting everyone around him, which was super irritating but he seemed just quick enough and just technically correct enough that his formula kind of worked, for him. I would come into work and he would be in a middle of an argument where he insisted some distinction that everyone else that was asinine, he felt was important, and he always got the last word. Everything from pronunciation to definitions of ordinary concepts, and it was visibly important to his self esteem how right he was about all of these things.
At one point he claimed I "didn't understand comedy" because I enjoyed Tim and Eric. If you don't know them, think adult swim style surrealist meta-humor but in lo-fi live action. And my theory for this particular co-worker is that something about what Tim and Eric make fun of must have hit too close to home, too close to his sense of normalcy, which in this case meant seeing them not as comedic personas but as familiar targets to "correct", only to realize they were part of a comedic persona satirizing a certain idea of normalcy, to his initial bafflement and then resentment. Because for a moment he could make a home in that world, and it was a world they were making fun of.
These are all my assumptions of course, but I think they map on to this Paris Hilton analysis, which is that for some reason he needed to see their entire way of doing comedy as not real or not legitimate, because doing so would mean something fundamental about his psychology was something that could be turned into a joke.
colechristensen
Eh, I don't think your analysis of your coworker is correct, or it might be technically correct but missing the point.
Some people are obnoxious because they never learned not to be. It's about empathy, bad habits, and never getting the right feedback. Of course there is accounting for people being different and your goal in life shouldn't be "never bother anybody", but some folks take things too far. In a work context a manager needs to take a dude aside and gently suggest they tone the behavior down. We don't want to be surrounded by either tone police or constant needless corrections.
wredcoll
> Increasingly, I think the “shameless” approach is becoming a dominant strategy today. It was first popularized in modern canon by Paris Hilton, who played the “dumb blonde heiress” stereotype so smoothly that everyone assumed she really was as stupid as she seemed.
This seems wildly unsupported. I lived through that era, and admittedly I wasn't breathlessly tuned into the latest celebrity gossip, but from a sort of second hand (or third or fourth) she seemed to say and do the exact same things as any other rich young socialite.
She went to parties with other celebs, had her fashiom choices reported on and occasionally said something mildly vapid.
The biggest moment, of course, was her ex-boyfriend selling their sex tape, but she wasn't the first or the last person to have someone publish private material.
Is the argument that she was the first woman to not commit suicide when that happened and there for she's shameless?
Or just that she was famous despite acting like an average wealthy child and that made people real mad?
It seems like a truly Reed Richards level stretch to get to someone like Trump who says and does a bunch of awful things most people thought were off limits for a politician and was rewarded by a bunch of awful people.
tw04
I’m guessing he’s more referring to the television show with Nicole Ritchie where they both acted shamelessly stupid for the attention.
I supposed it’s possible she’s really as dumb as she portrayed on her “reality” tv show, but I find it extremely unlikely given the money and education.
wredcoll
You know, that's fair, I completely forgot that show even existed. I guess I sort of categorize it as "a tv show" and thus fictional.
null
johnnyanmac
>much like any cult or counterculture, that person’s goal was to attract a following, regardless of who the members are. The disgust of one’s peers doesn’t matter anymore, because that disgust forms the basis for an entirely new community.
Well that's an unfortunately dangerous effect. But thinking about it, it really only takes a few dozen active members to kindle a community, and then they use that to grab in any vulnerable people who they pitch their scam to.
>The concept of a “genius mastermind” is itself outdated, because it assumes that someone needs to be in control. The shameless person is simply a host for a set of ideas, which, like any virus, will continue to propagate as long as there are willing hosts to receive it.
Yeah, fair enough. People just see a catalyst and it will attract a whole swarm of people who will use it to fit their agenda. I suppose it explains a lot of the clshing reports within the US administration this year. Lots of sabetours all trying to do their thing, but they are wrangling a mascot around who they need to keep pleased.
----
As usual, I don't even know how to start to address this. This article was in 2019, and for my country it definitely torpedoed down this decade. It just feels like the few powers left to check it are ransacking the country, and some part of the country is cheering on the destruction of everything. You can't really fight that kind of nihilism.
yalogin
Shamelessness is the guiding mantra in politics too, I guess the author wanted to stay away from the most obvious and egregious example. I don’t think we will be able to turn the tide here though. The hustle culture of Silicon Valley tried to draw a fine line for a while but it was never going to last. As a society we are an attention economy and that only values shamelessness, not ethics and morals.
thr0w
Unaccounted for: the failure scenario.
You had integrity, put in the work, and failed. Life is brutal - anyone can respect your effort.
You tried to be the next Paris, and failed. You look like a fucking clown.
johnnyanmac
There's some survivor bias. But like a virus, the next strain will be stronger and more potent from those survivors.
Very few people in 2004 could pull off the Paris. It's a lot easier in 2024.
nextworddev
The real underlying trend is the great shift in what’s good “taste” and Overton window
nextworddev
Well who cares about looking like a clown, considering there’s millions of them on LinkedIn and TikTok. Shame is diluted every day and no one cares
thr0w
> Well who cares about looking like a clown
A lot of people, almost instinctively, and for good reason.
This generally is a version of what economics and game theory knows as countersignalling. A classic paper is “Too Cool for School” https://host.kelley.iu.edu/riharbau/cs-randfinal.pdf
Always worth pondering when it works, and when, for whom, and how it fails.