Thanks for posting that very relevant reddit. Oddly enough - and this is not a point that we should all get religious - to anyone brought up in church traditions (and rejected them or not) it likely reminds them of the parable of the good Samaritan. The idea that the guy you look down upon is actually the guy that may well be the one that helps you in your hour of need. The learning obviously being that you shoudl stop being such a snotty git and love your neigbour.
You don't need to be religious to love this story, but it's worth noting that this is ancient and useful wisdom from sages of older times. (and, why I tend to reject organised religions nowadays, the kind of good thing co-opted, hegemonised and bastardised into all sorts of controlling and political things by subsequent institutions)
I have reddit blocked on my computers because for a very long period I wasted so much time there, but I bet I already know what story you're linking to. "Today you, tomorrow me". It spawned a subreddit by the same name.
I avoid reddit because it's a time black hole (100x worse than HN for me), but I really wish I could still benefit from the few things like this that get posted 1 out of 1,000,000+ comments.
I suspect a carefully coordinated PR campaign for Chick-fil-A, as I've noticed uncharacteristically, frequent positive references to them in unrelated news items lately. I consume a lot of news, and noticing "fake" planted positive references in tangentially related articles is par for the course for any company that stepped in deep shit like they did. I suspect at least one of these positive comments here to be a plant as well. If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works.
Sometime folks look at others who are not doing so well and decide to pick up the tab, or just feel like doing it for a complete stranger. Some of its religion, some of it is just spreading the wealth. Sometime its just looking at others in bad situations. Sometimes its just to make themselves feel better.
I've done it a couple of times. I payed for a young lady at a McDonalds because their credit card machine was out and she didn't have cash and had a kid with her. No big deal for me, but I would imagine it helped her day. I've bought one of the pink coffee mugs (breast cancer awareness) and told the clerk to give it to the next lady who comes in. I got to see the reaction, but she never knew who bought it.
Spread a little joy, the world's a circle and it comes back to you.
"If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works."
No, I just find it sad that you believe the dark corners of the world define the whole.
There are hundreds of stories about various companies on hn. The fact that you single out this one says more about your liberal bias than its objective "fakeness".
I agree with you, based on personal experience this happens, a lot. In the organizations I have been with, not everyone in the company even know it was a planted piece.
It could be a made up story, but there is a drive through coffee place in Michigan where this happens every so often. they even have a radio station sometimes coordinate it sometimes to see how long a chain they can get going.
Similar story here in the UK. I was paying for my McDonalds at the drive-thru when for whatever reason I looked in my mirror and saw a young girl sat crying in her car looking deeply depressed. I asked if I could pay whatever her meal, did so, picked mine up and looking in the mirror I could see a genuine smile appear.
I hope that if I cheered her up for even 2 seconds, she can see whatever happened to make her cry isn't going to keep her stuck feeling down.
"Perhaps the largest outbreak of drive-through generosity occurred last December at a Tim Hortons in Winnipeg, Manitoba, when 228 consecutive cars paid it forward."
Damn you socialist Canada. You did it with your healthcare and now you are doing it with your fast food too? :)
This is quite pointless because it essentially cancels out. To get a cooperative structure you have to give away surplus -- that is, people with more have to give it to people with less.
Yes, redistribution! That seems a dirty idea in a substantial part of USA politics. So 'pay it forward' chains are a peculiar thing: they summon the feeling of cooperation, in an acceptable way, without actually being effectively cooperative.
It is far from pointless. First of all the next person in line feels good, because a stranger helped them with no underhanded motives. Then there is a high chance they will pass it on, getting a second dose of feeling good, because most people feel good about helping others.
That's a double dose of feeling good. I don't see what is being cancelled out here.
The chains are peculiar yes, but not that peculiar: It's strongly ingrained in us to return favours, to the point that giving someone something is a brutally effective way of exploiting them by later asking for a bigger favour back (e.g. consider Hare Krishna, that tended to use flowers for this purpose). The effect is so strong that we often try to prevent receiving favours because we don't want to become indebted.
In that light, these chains are easy to explain: People might like the idea, but people are also likely to want to prevent a feeling of being indebted - if you can't pay back the person who did you the favour, paying it forward to the person is the next best thing. There's also social pressure to show that you're as charitable as the guy in front of you, and against being seen as the person who is either "too greedy" or too poor.
There's also very low perceived cost: You were intending to pay for your meal anyway; that you're actually paying for someone elses meal makes little difference for you - it's more like friends that takes turn paying the bill when going out, where it is a social gesture rather than an attempt at charity.
Others have focused on how "pay it forward" chains actually do produce surplus, of a particular kind. But what jumped out at me was the idea that you must have redistribution to get a cooperative structure:
> To get a cooperative structure you have to give away surplus -- that is, people with more have to give it to people with less. Yes, redistribution!
This is correct up right up until the hyphen. Cooperation involves giving away surplus, but everyone has surpluses on different axes. Someone good at software development might have no idea how to fix his car; he gives away his surplus software development talent to someone with more knowledge of auto mechanics. Obviously the trade isn't direct since the mechanic might not want his software--so the developer trades his software for money, then trades money for the repair. This is cooperation!
Ah, yes, you want a surplus, but a surplus of what exactly? No one cares about the burgers. It's a surplus of good-will and happiness that they want to create, and I think to that end it's very effective indeed.
If the person before me pays for my meal, I won't feel obliged to pay for the person after me.
How does it even work anyway? How do you know how much the person after you owes? It may work at drive ins but it's certainly impossible at a normal queue -- except if people leave a "standard amount" regardless of what the next order actually is.
And even at a drive-in where the amount of the next order is known, it's probably a big hassle for the cashier -- if not downright impossible: the point-of-sale system wants the exact amount if paid by card, and if using cash it's even more complex (the POS system tells the cashier how much to give back, and now this is false and has to be somewhat reconciled at the end of the day).
This is quite pointless because it essentially cancels out
This is ultimately what makes this so bizarre -- in the end such a chain has a single "benefactor", and then a number of what could best be described as victims: People who become a part of this process because of social obligation. Given that the people were already in line and obviously ready to pay for their order, this is unwelcome generosity, and it takes advantage of the law of reciprocity in many cultures.
This sounds really cynical, and I suppose it is, but I see nothing heart warming about Western culture in these acts. If someone randomly paid for other people's food, that is one thing, but what we're reading about now are people obligating the people behind them to pay for the people behind them, essentially trying to become a part of something -- the initiator -- for little.
If I pull up to Tim Hortons and just want a coffee and a donut, having to understand and then orchestrate the chain is not something I was looking for, and in the end I've gained nothing.
The expression was popularized by the best-selling novel “Pay It Forward” ... The protagonist does three good deeds and asks the beneficiaries to do three good deeds and so on.
The origins of this term are somewhat different, and worth noting. The normal mode of reciporocity is to 'pay it back'. However, there are certain times when this would be physically impossible. This is the origin of 'pay it forward'. It results from the humble notion: I can never pay it back, so I will pay it forward. It has nothing to do with scaling (3x), nor contingency (i did this for you, now you do this...etc). It is a response to an actual act of kindness or generosity that precisely lacks such a contingency (most usually because you will never interact with the person that helped you out, ever again). It would have been nice for the NY Times piece to note this correctly! Its just too bad that the actual understanding of the term could not be promulgated through what is otherwise a good piece (likely to be widely read).
I think a lot of people are on autopilot and just vote up negative stuff.
I think it has something to do with the fact that a lot of people here must be in a low mood because they're starting their own business and struggling, or hating their current job and wanting to do a startup.. I don't know. Just a hypothesis.
Could also have something to do with the natural skepticism of a lot of smart people who are used to poking holes in theories/systems/stories. All this is just conjecture of course but we should do a survey of some kind.
I come to HN for a balanced perspective. If the article is positive, then I want to hear the other side of it. Like the comment about how it has the feeling of being cooperative but not really effective in redistributing resources. I don't know if it's cooperation or altruism, but I'm okay with comments that don't necessarily reaffirm the positive tone of the article.
Sure, I'm a professional and I earn quite well, but any customer I've ever had will tell you that the value they received from me far exceeded what it cost them.
Delivering customer value. That's it for me. I'm really much less interested in all the other things we talk about here: languages, algorithms, hacks, investments, technology, etc. I'd rather hack my customers' problems than my own.
Why do I consider this paying if forward? Because of everyone who ever helped me get where I am: teachers, mentors, customers, peers, but mostly my parents and grandparents who all had difficult lives and made great sacrifices. They never had the opportunities I have now, a relatively easy life and the ability to turn nothing into something for someone else. I can't (literally) pay them back any more, but I can by paying it forward to others.
I always felt this way but never knew how to verbalize it until I heard the phrase "Pay it Forward". Thanks. Great HN post.
My mom is a single mother who worked really hard to give my brother, sister, and me what we have today. Even now she's still working in some awful factory to pay the bills. While I'm in some office making much more with less stress. Its crazy an depressing. So, I'm paying it back I guess. I help her with a good chunk of her bills. I hope one day I have enough income to pay everything for her, it'll be her reward for being a great parent. That day is coming soon!!
www.marcoledesma.com
Makes you think about how much fast food is consumed in the US. I like a McBurger myself once in a while, but people eat altogether too much of that junk over there.
Nice article though: people in the US, especially outside the big cities, are often very kind. My Italian wife is always pleasantly surprised by this when we're there.
Jonathan's Card had one key characteristic that made it exploitable (even if Sam hadn't been able to transfer money off of it): there was a reliable way of knowing how much money was on the card, and therefore a reliable way of choosing when to spend (or siphon) money from the card to get high value. I'm not aware of a reliable way of knowing that the car in front of you is "paying it forward".
That makes me curious: is it possible to exploit by starting a pay-it-forward chain and then circling back around with a bigger order? Would there be a particular number of cars or time of day or order size that would maximize the likelihood of getting your final order paid for, and would it have a positive expectation when accounting for the initial outlay and the time commitment?
[Note that I am not advocating actually trying this; I'm satisfied with it as a thought experiment.]
This happened with Starbucks years ago. At the time, people accused Starbucks of staging it. Recently, Starbucks has been making "pay it forward" be a official promotion:
I thought the gesture was great, although I couldn't help wondering if it's an act of kindness to give away fast food in a nation that is struggling with obesity.
I've thought about doing this myself at Starbucks. But then I wonder if the person behind me is a car packed full of kids and their parents have rung up $25+ of frappuccinos. As I don't want the awkwardness of asking the drive thru barista the total cost of what the person behind me ordered, I haven't attempted it yet.
I'm guessing by the time I get to the window to pay, they have already taken the person behind me's order, and know the expected price right?
Sometimes I wish I had the option of tipping the fast food joint employees, as I think it would make them happier. Starbucks too, if you pay with credit card (as we are increasingly doing so), then we don't have that option anymore.
To add to the last point, I'd like to be able to give money direct to the employees, as I feel they wouldn't get a fair piece of it if the company was allowed to disburse it.
Happend to us on the San Mateo Bridge (westbound) a couple of years back. We felt special but did not pay it forward. Instead, told the lady at the booth to consider the fee a tip :)
What good does to pay a meal for a person that could very much be paying their own meal? They can pay hundreds of dollars for a car, tens of dollars for a full tank of gasoline, yet they can't pay for a 4 dollars Big Mac?
If I had no money the last place for spending it would be on a fast-food place. There is much more you can do with 4 dollars. You can get better and healthier food.
So, instead why not help people who actually can't afford a Big Mac?
>They can pay hundreds of dollars for a car, tens of dollars for a full tank of gasoline, yet they can't pay for a 4 dollars Big Mac? //
I've been in this situation. We need a car for work and so the outlay on the car and the gas is required if we want to earn money with the car. We can't however afford to eat at McDo' so you wouldn't find us in the line [also I disprove of drive-through].
Of course, the only reason this works is that it is not socially acceptable to break the chain in this circumstance. For instance, if there was a tip/charity jar (and I'm guessing there isn't in the cases this works) I would simply put my surplus into the tip jar and break the chain, because I find this idea annoying. If there is no tip jar, I would have no choice but to continue the chain.
[+] [-] e40|12 years ago|reply
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/elal2/have_you_ev...
A much better "pay it forward" story.
[+] [-] triplesec|12 years ago|reply
You don't need to be religious to love this story, but it's worth noting that this is ancient and useful wisdom from sages of older times. (and, why I tend to reject organised religions nowadays, the kind of good thing co-opted, hegemonised and bastardised into all sorts of controlling and political things by subsequent institutions)
[+] [-] naterator|12 years ago|reply
I avoid reddit because it's a time black hole (100x worse than HN for me), but I really wish I could still benefit from the few things like this that get posted 1 out of 1,000,000+ comments.
[+] [-] GuerraEarth|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bsenftner|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] protomyth|12 years ago|reply
Sometime folks look at others who are not doing so well and decide to pick up the tab, or just feel like doing it for a complete stranger. Some of its religion, some of it is just spreading the wealth. Sometime its just looking at others in bad situations. Sometimes its just to make themselves feel better.
I've done it a couple of times. I payed for a young lady at a McDonalds because their credit card machine was out and she didn't have cash and had a kid with her. No big deal for me, but I would imagine it helped her day. I've bought one of the pink coffee mugs (breast cancer awareness) and told the clerk to give it to the next lady who comes in. I got to see the reaction, but she never knew who bought it.
Spread a little joy, the world's a circle and it comes back to you.
"If you think this is paranoid, you don't know how our world works."
No, I just find it sad that you believe the dark corners of the world define the whole.
[+] [-] dictum|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yetanotherphd|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] janesvilleseo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbuzbee|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Natsu|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drcode|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] t2d2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dmourati|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DanBC|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbrooksuk|12 years ago|reply
I hope that if I cheered her up for even 2 seconds, she can see whatever happened to make her cry isn't going to keep her stuck feeling down.
[+] [-] johnyello|12 years ago|reply
Seriously, why the fuck would someone education enough to be on HN be eating that fast food crap? If you really want a burger in the UK, go to Byrons.
[+] [-] csel|12 years ago|reply
Damn you socialist Canada. You did it with your healthcare and now you are doing it with your fast food too? :)
[+] [-] VLM|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hxa7241|12 years ago|reply
Yes, redistribution! That seems a dirty idea in a substantial part of USA politics. So 'pay it forward' chains are a peculiar thing: they summon the feeling of cooperation, in an acceptable way, without actually being effectively cooperative.
[+] [-] SeanDav|12 years ago|reply
It is far from pointless. First of all the next person in line feels good, because a stranger helped them with no underhanded motives. Then there is a high chance they will pass it on, getting a second dose of feeling good, because most people feel good about helping others.
That's a double dose of feeling good. I don't see what is being cancelled out here.
[+] [-] vidarh|12 years ago|reply
In that light, these chains are easy to explain: People might like the idea, but people are also likely to want to prevent a feeling of being indebted - if you can't pay back the person who did you the favour, paying it forward to the person is the next best thing. There's also social pressure to show that you're as charitable as the guy in front of you, and against being seen as the person who is either "too greedy" or too poor.
There's also very low perceived cost: You were intending to pay for your meal anyway; that you're actually paying for someone elses meal makes little difference for you - it's more like friends that takes turn paying the bill when going out, where it is a social gesture rather than an attempt at charity.
[+] [-] enoch_r|12 years ago|reply
> To get a cooperative structure you have to give away surplus -- that is, people with more have to give it to people with less. Yes, redistribution!
This is correct up right up until the hyphen. Cooperation involves giving away surplus, but everyone has surpluses on different axes. Someone good at software development might have no idea how to fix his car; he gives away his surplus software development talent to someone with more knowledge of auto mechanics. Obviously the trade isn't direct since the mechanic might not want his software--so the developer trades his software for money, then trades money for the repair. This is cooperation!
[+] [-] Osmium|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bambax|12 years ago|reply
If the person before me pays for my meal, I won't feel obliged to pay for the person after me.
How does it even work anyway? How do you know how much the person after you owes? It may work at drive ins but it's certainly impossible at a normal queue -- except if people leave a "standard amount" regardless of what the next order actually is.
And even at a drive-in where the amount of the next order is known, it's probably a big hassle for the cashier -- if not downright impossible: the point-of-sale system wants the exact amount if paid by card, and if using cash it's even more complex (the POS system tells the cashier how much to give back, and now this is false and has to be somewhat reconciled at the end of the day).
This sounds completely fake.
[+] [-] frogpelt|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] corresation|12 years ago|reply
This is ultimately what makes this so bizarre -- in the end such a chain has a single "benefactor", and then a number of what could best be described as victims: People who become a part of this process because of social obligation. Given that the people were already in line and obviously ready to pay for their order, this is unwelcome generosity, and it takes advantage of the law of reciprocity in many cultures.
This sounds really cynical, and I suppose it is, but I see nothing heart warming about Western culture in these acts. If someone randomly paid for other people's food, that is one thing, but what we're reading about now are people obligating the people behind them to pay for the people behind them, essentially trying to become a part of something -- the initiator -- for little.
If I pull up to Tim Hortons and just want a coffee and a donut, having to understand and then orchestrate the chain is not something I was looking for, and in the end I've gained nothing.
[+] [-] 001sky|12 years ago|reply
The origins of this term are somewhat different, and worth noting. The normal mode of reciporocity is to 'pay it back'. However, there are certain times when this would be physically impossible. This is the origin of 'pay it forward'. It results from the humble notion: I can never pay it back, so I will pay it forward. It has nothing to do with scaling (3x), nor contingency (i did this for you, now you do this...etc). It is a response to an actual act of kindness or generosity that precisely lacks such a contingency (most usually because you will never interact with the person that helped you out, ever again). It would have been nice for the NY Times piece to note this correctly! Its just too bad that the actual understanding of the term could not be promulgated through what is otherwise a good piece (likely to be widely read).
[+] [-] fredsanford|12 years ago|reply
Sometimes, reading stuff here just makes me go WTF???
[+] [-] jval|12 years ago|reply
I think it has something to do with the fact that a lot of people here must be in a low mood because they're starting their own business and struggling, or hating their current job and wanting to do a startup.. I don't know. Just a hypothesis.
Could also have something to do with the natural skepticism of a lot of smart people who are used to poking holes in theories/systems/stories. All this is just conjecture of course but we should do a survey of some kind.
[+] [-] mapcar|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] edw519|12 years ago|reply
Sure, I'm a professional and I earn quite well, but any customer I've ever had will tell you that the value they received from me far exceeded what it cost them.
Delivering customer value. That's it for me. I'm really much less interested in all the other things we talk about here: languages, algorithms, hacks, investments, technology, etc. I'd rather hack my customers' problems than my own.
Why do I consider this paying if forward? Because of everyone who ever helped me get where I am: teachers, mentors, customers, peers, but mostly my parents and grandparents who all had difficult lives and made great sacrifices. They never had the opportunities I have now, a relatively easy life and the ability to turn nothing into something for someone else. I can't (literally) pay them back any more, but I can by paying it forward to others.
I always felt this way but never knew how to verbalize it until I heard the phrase "Pay it Forward". Thanks. Great HN post.
[+] [-] marcoperuano|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] patrickmay|12 years ago|reply
That's the whole point of capitalism (as opposed to what our non-representatives in DC call capitalism) -- with free trade everyone is better off.
[+] [-] davidw|12 years ago|reply
Nice article though: people in the US, especially outside the big cities, are often very kind. My Italian wife is always pleasantly surprised by this when we're there.
[+] [-] adhipg|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alecsmart1|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shrikant|12 years ago|reply
You then just ask for your bill to include theirs as well. Or if you're part of a chain then just state that you'd like to pay their bill instead.
[+] [-] mzahir|12 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2877779
[+] [-] lotharbot|12 years ago|reply
That makes me curious: is it possible to exploit by starting a pay-it-forward chain and then circling back around with a bigger order? Would there be a particular number of cars or time of day or order size that would maximize the likelihood of getting your final order paid for, and would it have a positive expectation when accounting for the initial outlay and the time commitment?
[Note that I am not advocating actually trying this; I'm satisfied with it as a thought experiment.]
[+] [-] danso|12 years ago|reply
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2004084452_webstarbuc...
[+] [-] webhat|12 years ago|reply
Could just be me.
[+] [-] jongold|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lmm|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoshGlazebrook|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brianbreslin|12 years ago|reply
Sometimes I wish I had the option of tipping the fast food joint employees, as I think it would make them happier. Starbucks too, if you pay with credit card (as we are increasingly doing so), then we don't have that option anymore.
To add to the last point, I'd like to be able to give money direct to the employees, as I feel they wouldn't get a fair piece of it if the company was allowed to disburse it.
[+] [-] ronilan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] renang|12 years ago|reply
What good does to pay a meal for a person that could very much be paying their own meal? They can pay hundreds of dollars for a car, tens of dollars for a full tank of gasoline, yet they can't pay for a 4 dollars Big Mac?
If I had no money the last place for spending it would be on a fast-food place. There is much more you can do with 4 dollars. You can get better and healthier food.
So, instead why not help people who actually can't afford a Big Mac?
[+] [-] pbhjpbhj|12 years ago|reply
I've been in this situation. We need a car for work and so the outlay on the car and the gas is required if we want to earn money with the car. We can't however afford to eat at McDo' so you wouldn't find us in the line [also I disprove of drive-through].
[+] [-] drcode|12 years ago|reply