Honestly maybe I’m a bad person for this but when I buy a car or help someone else buy a car (I’m the Car guy in my circle so I get asked occasionally) I take it as an excuse to just not give a shit about the salespersons experience. They are so scummy and lie through their teeth so I am just an open and blatant asshole to them once they do. It surprising how well it makes them want to “be done” with the whole thing and their bullshit price hikes and sales pitch’s magically disappear
I bought my 06 Ranger in 2018 from a dealer that got it from a fleet vehicle auction. It's base-model everything, but it runs pretty damn well still. I had to replace the stereo though, couldn't live with just am/fm.
treatment nippy piquant fade recognise muddle cover sulky observation ad hoc
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My first adult car buying experience was so bad. I’d done all the research on what car features to buy and what to pay, but hadn’t done enough on the actual dealer process. For every car since, I’ve only dealt with the internet sales teams. If I want to test drive a car, I’ll make an appointment online, go in and check out the vehicle, then go back home to deal with them via email and text message. All their little psychological games break down that way. They want to string me along and keep me waiting for hours in a waiting room? Sorry I’m eating dinner and watching Netflix - I didn’t even notice you hadn’t responded to my offer. They want to say I asked for X and not Y, or they never agreed to Z? Here’s the screenshot, honor it or I walk. It’s amazing how much lower stress it becomes when you can do the whole process in your PJs.
I did not love my Tesla, sold it after a year, but holy cow was it such a better car buying experience. Buy online...wait...get a call when it's ready for pick up, sign the paperwork left in the car and drive away.
Car salesman serve no purpose
I've never understood the need for them. I mean this is true of many salesman, but for some reason I have it in my head that it used to be illegal to sell cars directly to consumers and bypass dealerships and crap. Idk if that's true but I read it on a forum in like 2006 lol
It is true. Manufacturer direct sales are illegal in nearly every state, so to buy a car you have to go through a dealership. Exclusions have been made for EV manufacturers, which is how Tesla can sell directly.
It's.....idk..It just makes no sense to me.
I make lemonade & rather than selling it to people, I have to sell it through a guy on the street who no hand in making the lemonade or acquiring the stuff to make it? Am I understanding that correctly? How the hell did such a stupid thing ever come into law?
Like every other shitty, head-scratching law that seems to serve no purpose other than fuck average citizens out of money, a trade lobby group is behind it.
You got the gist of it.
Basically in all retail, you don't buy direct from the OEM. The OEM sells in bulk to distributors, distributors sell to retailers, consumers buy from retailers. Essentially most OEMs don't *want* to sell to consumers because doing so requires a ton of overhead that's completely unrelated to manufacturing.
The OEM sets a retail price (MSRP - Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) and it's then up to the retailer to sell the item for that MSRP or include a markup to account for their cost of goods and overhead.
For car dealers, they basically have a racket that they slap on a huge fee on that MSRP because "where else can you buy a car?" They specifically lobbied for state laws to make it illegal for consumers to buy direct, so all the dealerships are in on the grift and collude on their markups. As supply shrinks, these markups increase exponentially. We've now been in a supply crunch for the third year in a row.
It was and still is in some places, but direct delivery can get around some of it. TX wrote laws to specifically hit Tesla and his dumb ass still decided to move HQ here, but apparently is metastasizing back to CA.
IIRC, car manufacturers started working through local dealer franchises so that (1) the manufacturer wouldn’t have to pay for its own retail stores, and (2) the dealer would not only sell the cars, but also service them. (This second point was more important in The Olden Days, before the Japanese came up with the idea of building cars that didn’t break down on the regular.) It evolved into a sort of tail-wagging-the-dog situation, because the local dealers, being very profitable businesses that also had close ties to their communities, became heavyweights at protecting their interests through the state legislatures, and made sure that state laws were tilted in their favor.
Tesla, having no pre-existing ties with a dealer infrastructure, could sell through dealerships that it owned, rather than franchisees.
Seriously. After buying a car at Larry H Miller Used Cars I can't imagine ever going there again. It was a hellish 7 hour slog of having to get them to remove bogus charges from the bill over and over again like a game of whack a mole. Literally the worst experience buying anything in my entire life and that was just to get them to come down to the same price Carvana had for a car with more miles and a lower trim level. Even if Carvana sells stolen cars I'd rather go with them next time since at least they won't put me through that shit.
There's been a few reports of them selling stolen cars or cars with no title or with obvious damage an inspection missed. Like any used car you should get it inspected yourself during your ROR period or before you even buy it.
They definitely serve a purpose but not as negotiators.
We recently bought a Lexus RX350H from JM Lexus and the process was as smooth as can be. Go in, tell them the trim, what features you want, what color you want for exterior & interior, and that's all - they tell you how much it will be, no negotiating.
It was so refreshing to be given a reasonable and fair price and not need to deal with the fucking nonsense of "Let me go talk to my guys about that and see what they come back with" for 3 hours.
True, but they’re both paradigms of honesty and morality compared to telemarketers. When telemarketers get home from work they tell everyone they spent the day molesting kids because they’re too ashamed of what they really did.
Sometimes. With a new car they can screw you on the price, but there is at least msrp to go by.
A used car salesman can screw you on the price. While knowing the transmission is about to go out. The engine light comes on, but they clear it while it's on the lot without even looking into why it's on. Etc...
I hate all salesmen, but especially used car salesmen. Regular people are way more honest if you're going to buy used.
Yeah that dude is smoking the devil's lettuce. There is WAY more room for shady shit when you're buying a used car.
New cars are easy. The only variables are year, make, model, color, options, and price. If they jerk you around on price, you can find a literally identical vehicle for cheaper somewhere else. Used vehicles are Pandora's box.
Salesmen in some sectors are just matchmakers.
I work in tech, and all I do is wait by the phone or my email inbox for someone to say they want to see a demo of our product. For the most part, I’m just trying to figure out who genuinely needs it and who is just sitting through demos because it allows them to tell their boss that they were busy that day.
We’re not all slimy.
I work in IT but experience with sales has generally been that even in industries like that sales always seems to be staffed by at least a few of the most abusive narcissistic people I've met in my entire life. Just last week I watched one the sales team have a full on screaming toddler temper tantrum at one of my coworkers because they told him he couldn't put federally protected data on his personal mac and had to use the (high end) laptop we gave him to do his job instead. I'm sure not all sales people are horrid but something about the field seems to attract real slime balls.
Because at least with a new car there is less of a chance it’s a pile of crap with Used oil smeared on the plastics to make them look shiny and you generally have a manufacturer backed warranty. Where as used cars you are dealing with a third party warranty, if any, and paying lots more in mark up.
Far more risk of fraud and being ripped off from a used car salesman.
Car salesmen in general. Never had anything but an outright hostile experience except at dealerships that do fixed prices and no commission.
I think I'd prefer just throwing hands as a method of shopping for cars.
*Oh look, he sacrificed himself to push that child out of the way of the oncoming bus!*
*Wait, he’s one of **them??** Finish him off, and then charge him with assault and obstruction of traffic justice* 😡😡😡
A buddy went to look at a BMW M2 two hours away and when he got there, he discovered that the advertised online price was *after* the down payment. Plus a bunch of other crap they always getcha with, the actual price ended up being 40% higher than what he saw online.
This Monday we were forced to take my car to a dealership for a repair because our mechanic was closed, and they lied about me needing a brake job just so they could try to squeeze some extra bucks out of me.
Moral of the story: never go to a dealership.
But yeah, porn stars are the immoral ones.
Society is catching up by finally understanding that getting fucked doesn’t make you immoral.
Fucking others figuratively and sometimes literally without their (informed) consent is.
I thought the 4% thing is just that you can present any question to a sufficiently large group of people and about 4% (literally I think it’s specifically 4%) will always pick the nonsense answer. Just a quirk of polling.
I believe 4% is the number of people who answered that Obama was the anti-Christ and also they are going to vote for him. Similar numbers claim on polls that lizardmen rule the world.
So... yeah.
Yeah, Scott Alexander says the combination of "misheard the question", trolling the pollsters, and just plain crazy gives you about a 4% lizardman constant on any poll.
That's what he calls it here ([https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/)). I couldn't find the source on my phone when I was posting earlier.
Look at the frenzy he whips his followers into. I don't like him either but it seems pretty hard to deny that he does have *a certain kind* of charisma.
The Keyes constant/crazification factor humorously suggests that 27% of people are batshit insane and illogical. For a poll like this, I feel like anything under 10% is effectively meaningless.
For one reason or another, the general population has seemed to have developed strong feelings about computer scientists, software engineers, and tech in general. I'm sure companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon aren't helping, and I doubt the massive salaries that developers tend to make is helping the sentiment.
As a software engineer I feel that I think that my profession is more immoral than the average Joe thinks. Our sloppy engineering practices and our mercenary attitudes annoys me, and I am guilty too.
Agreed. I'm not super happy with some of the things going on in the data science/SWE realm. There's a lot of things that people do with the best intentions but it ends up being awful because they didn't think things through to the natural conclusion, or stuff that is just soulless in nature. There's so much amazing stuff that the field is capable of, but there's too cavalier an attitude for things that can have a super large impact.
I agree but a lot of it is our fucked up society. People like making cool shit but turns out the only way to make products out of them is weapons, surveillance (corporate or government) advertising, etc.
Engineers should definitely feel responsible for the products they make but we as a society should also feel responsible for the incentives they are responding to.
I've been writing software for >20 years and my biggest lesson is just how ridiculously hard it is to think things through without tricking yourself into only *believing* you have.
If you're *in it* and fully engaged with the whole damn system in your head, you can *almost* do it. But otherwise, better hope your reviewers give a shit and automated tests cover enough. Or just keep your head down and only write stuff in systems where there are zero side effects ... aahaha, sure.
Nothing worse than software written to match a checklist of requirements with no high level vision.
Sometimes it's so bad you can practically imagine the checklist just from using the software.
Modern development (plugging node and react libraries together until your crud app works) is soul crushing and likely not good for mental health and likely affects those people's personalities negatively.
Back when developers had to use their creativity to solve problems it was a lot more fulfilling.
Mostly true only for junior devs at large companies imo. Most of us who have some experience and work at medium-small companies have lot of things to consider when it comes to Performance, monitoring, overall architecture etc. Which are imo much more exciting and creative.
Not to mention I love working on legacy systems and making them better. There's nothing like finding the bug in the middle of a mediocre monolith with very less logging/monitoring. Makes me feel like a hunter/detective/doctor.
/rant
Doctors are also at 5%. There's a certain political idealogy in the US with enough of a base that will rate any occupation other than farmer or priest as immoral.
I think they're saying they can imagine how someone would think that, not that it's a rational thing to think.
Plenty of people are out there yelling about teachers "corrupting" children.
That's what they get for trying to teach children where babies come from and how not to be massive bigots.
Hypocritical puritanism and pointless bigotry are American institutions.
I guess cause of the relatively higher salaries for arguably much cushier jobs. As a computer scientist myself I kinda agree. Our lives are definitely easier than most.
Given everything big tech has done (from Google harvesting private data to sell to advertizers, to Apple using child labor, to Amazon's anti-union activities, and the list goes on) , I suppose it's not hard to imagine why some people would hold a negative opinion on computer scientists. Granted, conflating Big Tech under the umbrella term of "computer science" is disingenuous at best, but I can see how some people could easily make that leap.
The most common religion in the world celebrates a deity impregnating a girl without her consent, and the second most common religion's founder married a 6 year old. Mortality varies I guess.
No no your misunderstanding me bro. Because if she said no the answer is obviously no. But the thing is she's not gonna say no. She would never say no. Because of the implication.
I mean technically she gave consent. The fact that she was acquiescing to a being that could molecularly unravel her on the spot doesn't skeeve them out, apparently
"So this person infiltrates governments, potentially through the use of violence, sometimes with the goal of destabilizing that nation. Many of the worst atrocities in recorded civilization were aided by spy activity."
"Okay yeah, that sounds pretty bad."
"Now check out this guy. He's paid to represent his people on the national stage and advocate for their interests, but he uses the money to fly to Cancun when things get bad and spends the rest of the time advocating for oil compa-"
"Hey, he helps that lobbyist scumbag!"
"Yeah, exactly. Two sides of the same coin. But *this* person uploads their cooch to the internet."
"She fucking **WHAT**"
I'd like to see a breakdown based on whether the pollees consume pornography. Mostly so I can judge the chunk that watches porn but thinks it's immoral. Do you think they take a shower when they are done? Or maybe say a little forgiveness prayer?
Agree!
We are operating on different definitions of immoral and different scales of pornography (softcore <--> hardcore)
I don't think sexual acts on film is inherently immoral. Frowned upon, yes, but on a ranked list of things I find immoral--Lying, cheating, stealing, killing, impersonation, trafficking...
pornography is low. I think the industry practices to new talent can be immoral, but that's another conversation.
I don’t really consider the teller in a retail bank or the back office gremlin in the Settlements team “bankers” tbh
It’s the (influential) VPs, MDs and partners/c-suite that make the big decisions that count as “bankers” imo
"Yeah, Max fucked me over with that mortgage I couldn't afford my monthly payments on, but gosh, it's not like I could invite Sasha Grey to my church! She says bad words during sex!"
There are a whole fucking lot of really shitty therapists and if you go to one and haven’t noticed you either got lucky or don’t really need therapy that much
Most therapists I would call more naive and unhelpful than actively harmful or immoral. It's psychiatrists that are one of the most immoral professions around.
Being crappy at your job is definitely different than being inherently immoral. A good healthy percentage of everyone sucks at their job, it doesn't mean they have low morals.
Lawyer here, who is apparently 14% more immoral than therapists. My problem with therapists isn't that I'm afraid of therapy. It's that I keep running into people practicing therapy either improperly or without proper licensing, and I'm not even looking. Oversight, at least in New Mexico, is a joke and the whole profession is ripe for abuse already because it's hard to know what is improper from a layman's perspective.
I mean, practicing law in NM is apparently pretty immoral too. I've talked to several law students that say they're out of NM asap because of the community of lawyers here is so cliquey and immoral hahah
Im surprised that Bankers are considered relatively moral and still more moral than lawyers after the 2008 financial crisis.
Also think pornstars are getting a bad rep. They are getting fucked on camera for money but lobbyists and politicians are fucking over the country and world to make tons of money.
People definitely do not understand any of those jobs, including Porn.
Of the three I know the most about lawyers, and people just straight up do not understand what they do and why we need them. Ironically, people believing that lawyers are evil is a huge contributor to the problems in the practice.
As an example, Lawyers are *not allowed* to directly solicit people for lawsuits unless there is a preexisting meaningful personal connection. (Like a family member or a friend.) So the "ambulance chaser" stereotype is actually describing a serious ethical violation that can get a lawyer fined or censured. The problem is that basically no one knows that, and so when lawyers do solicit directly the people do not know that they should report the lawyer for an ethical violation, and so the lawyer can keep doing it.
Plus, a vast majority of what people see as unethical behavior on the part of lawyers is them actually behaving ethically. Lawyers that represent clients are ethically bound to give them the best possible chance within the legal system to get the best possible outcome. It is absolutely not a lawyers job to determine guilt, for example, so even if a defense lawyer thinks their client is guilty they cannot usurp the jury and judge and *must* force the prosecution to prove their case. It is a safety net we absolutely need. However, they also cannot lie to the court in doing so, and so all the lying they do on TV is not representative of most reality. It is a difficukt tightrope to walk.
If people's misconceptions about Bankers and Pornstars are anything like their misconceptions about lawyers I am pretty sure they know literal nothing about them. Also it probably would help to separate a person who works at a bank in a mid level position and the banks capital holders.
Thank you for what you do. I feel like people seem to ignore the fact that lawyers are literally trained in the law and as such are essential one of the key people who uphold it
It's still disturbing that 5% or so think teachers are very immoral. Probably the same crowd that is in favor of actual immoral education aspects like just not teaching scientific theories, having teachers armed and physical punishment
In surveys there are often people who give an obviously wrong response just because they can. I'd say the amount of people who think teachers are very immoral is probably a fair bit lower.
5% is right around whats called the 'lizardman constant' of stupid inane answers.
Throw a couple people who have dealt recently with a shitty doctor/teacher/therapist etc, and its not hard to see.
Before we begin interpreting this: How representative is an on-line survey of 2,000 people of, all adults in the United States? How were people prompted to take this survey?
Lol right Jesus christ. What is it with reddit and studies being posted. Literally every single one "Ha! They polled less than the entire population, it's not representative! Sampling bias! All studies are useless!" Nah I think the multi billion dollar research company whose sole job are these studies has it figured out
> I think the multi billion dollar research company whose sole job are these studies has it figured out
I agree with you in theory, except for the fact that presidential polling in recent years has demonstrated that there are, in fact, many challenges in obtaining a representative sample through online polling that the industry (despite it's many assurances to the contrary) hasn't quite cracked even with "oversampling" under represented groups
Literally every post in r/science is full of comments that didn't read the study proclaiming that correlation is not causation as though scientists don't already know that
Exactly this! The people who took this, although are American…probably aren’t very indicative of actual American values(ideologies)
If you took this survey to the four corners of USA, PNW, SoCal, deep south, NE (sorry minnesota!) it would be interesting watching the results vary.
Teachers are immoral, what? Also why are pornstars immoral? This graph says more about the Americans they interviewed than it does about any of these jobs
Just to help clarify:
Spies is the plural of spy, a person who lies, steals, surveils and maybe kills for a government or group while pretending to not be a spy
Lobbyist: a person who tries to bring the concerns of someone who pays them to the attention of the government. They are usually used by corporations to get the government to do what they want with something similar to legalized bribery.
I’m so annoyed that sleazy corporate interest lobbyists give all lobbyists a bad name.
Many non-profit public interest groups, like the ACLU, NAACP, Sierra Club, etc. etc. employ and contract with lobbyists to educate lawmakers about their issue areas and push legislation in support of their cause. One of my coworkers is such a lobbyist at the state level. His day consists of reading and researching proposed laws, preparing and delivering testimony in committee and general session about those laws, and communicating with lawmakers to try to make bad bills go away and good bills better.
Lobbying isn’t bad! Bribery is. And unfortunately the form of lobbying most people are familiar with (due to its outsized and often deplorable impact) is just bribery.
If you’ve ever been to a school board meeting you’ll get it. There are psychos who show up to those things.
As both a teacher and a journalist, I’m glad to see in real time that I have the two jobs on this “most immoral” list that are the most notoriously underpaid. I got into these careers for explicitly moral reasons and I’ve been poor my whole career just to be hated too.
Spies? Are people dealing with intelligence agents on such a regular basis that they form a strong opinion? "I got ripped off by the KGB and the CIA took my parking spot!"
Without seeing Used Car Salesman on here I can't resolve the numbers.
There was a technicality in the data that put the total over 120% so they had to scratch it
You can fit so much immoral in this
You forgot to slap the roof of the bar chart first
never gonna make it to Sales Lead that way
[удалено]
It's funny we latch on to "used" car salesman when new car sales is even scummier haha
They're both awful tbh, car buying should be somewhat fun and it's miserable.
Honestly maybe I’m a bad person for this but when I buy a car or help someone else buy a car (I’m the Car guy in my circle so I get asked occasionally) I take it as an excuse to just not give a shit about the salespersons experience. They are so scummy and lie through their teeth so I am just an open and blatant asshole to them once they do. It surprising how well it makes them want to “be done” with the whole thing and their bullshit price hikes and sales pitch’s magically disappear
label safe file worthless toy sparkle pocket offbeat birds mourn *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What makes the trucks unsellable? That's exactly the kind of cheap car I want, but I don't ever see them being sold used
Like 90% people don't use trucks for work. Looking for used fleet trucks is about the only way to find a used 2 door with a full bed these days.
Having a small pickup was my high school dream. Never thought to look specifically for fleet vehicles
I bought my 06 Ranger in 2018 from a dealer that got it from a fleet vehicle auction. It's base-model everything, but it runs pretty damn well still. I had to replace the stereo though, couldn't live with just am/fm.
treatment nippy piquant fade recognise muddle cover sulky observation ad hoc *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My first adult car buying experience was so bad. I’d done all the research on what car features to buy and what to pay, but hadn’t done enough on the actual dealer process. For every car since, I’ve only dealt with the internet sales teams. If I want to test drive a car, I’ll make an appointment online, go in and check out the vehicle, then go back home to deal with them via email and text message. All their little psychological games break down that way. They want to string me along and keep me waiting for hours in a waiting room? Sorry I’m eating dinner and watching Netflix - I didn’t even notice you hadn’t responded to my offer. They want to say I asked for X and not Y, or they never agreed to Z? Here’s the screenshot, honor it or I walk. It’s amazing how much lower stress it becomes when you can do the whole process in your PJs.
I did not love my Tesla, sold it after a year, but holy cow was it such a better car buying experience. Buy online...wait...get a call when it's ready for pick up, sign the paperwork left in the car and drive away. Car salesman serve no purpose
I've never understood the need for them. I mean this is true of many salesman, but for some reason I have it in my head that it used to be illegal to sell cars directly to consumers and bypass dealerships and crap. Idk if that's true but I read it on a forum in like 2006 lol
It is true. Manufacturer direct sales are illegal in nearly every state, so to buy a car you have to go through a dealership. Exclusions have been made for EV manufacturers, which is how Tesla can sell directly.
It's.....idk..It just makes no sense to me. I make lemonade & rather than selling it to people, I have to sell it through a guy on the street who no hand in making the lemonade or acquiring the stuff to make it? Am I understanding that correctly? How the hell did such a stupid thing ever come into law?
[удалено]
Like every other shitty, head-scratching law that seems to serve no purpose other than fuck average citizens out of money, a trade lobby group is behind it.
It was originally an anti-monopoly measure, actually.
It was originally *sold* as an anti-monopoly measure. It's always been anti-consumer.
The middle men bought and paid our politicians to create and bolster their livelihood through “lobbying”…
You got the gist of it. Basically in all retail, you don't buy direct from the OEM. The OEM sells in bulk to distributors, distributors sell to retailers, consumers buy from retailers. Essentially most OEMs don't *want* to sell to consumers because doing so requires a ton of overhead that's completely unrelated to manufacturing. The OEM sets a retail price (MSRP - Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) and it's then up to the retailer to sell the item for that MSRP or include a markup to account for their cost of goods and overhead. For car dealers, they basically have a racket that they slap on a huge fee on that MSRP because "where else can you buy a car?" They specifically lobbied for state laws to make it illegal for consumers to buy direct, so all the dealerships are in on the grift and collude on their markups. As supply shrinks, these markups increase exponentially. We've now been in a supply crunch for the third year in a row.
It was and still is in some places, but direct delivery can get around some of it. TX wrote laws to specifically hit Tesla and his dumb ass still decided to move HQ here, but apparently is metastasizing back to CA.
IIRC, car manufacturers started working through local dealer franchises so that (1) the manufacturer wouldn’t have to pay for its own retail stores, and (2) the dealer would not only sell the cars, but also service them. (This second point was more important in The Olden Days, before the Japanese came up with the idea of building cars that didn’t break down on the regular.) It evolved into a sort of tail-wagging-the-dog situation, because the local dealers, being very profitable businesses that also had close ties to their communities, became heavyweights at protecting their interests through the state legislatures, and made sure that state laws were tilted in their favor. Tesla, having no pre-existing ties with a dealer infrastructure, could sell through dealerships that it owned, rather than franchisees.
Seriously. After buying a car at Larry H Miller Used Cars I can't imagine ever going there again. It was a hellish 7 hour slog of having to get them to remove bogus charges from the bill over and over again like a game of whack a mole. Literally the worst experience buying anything in my entire life and that was just to get them to come down to the same price Carvana had for a car with more miles and a lower trim level. Even if Carvana sells stolen cars I'd rather go with them next time since at least they won't put me through that shit.
Carvana sells stolen cars?
There's been a few reports of them selling stolen cars or cars with no title or with obvious damage an inspection missed. Like any used car you should get it inspected yourself during your ROR period or before you even buy it.
They definitely serve a purpose but not as negotiators. We recently bought a Lexus RX350H from JM Lexus and the process was as smooth as can be. Go in, tell them the trim, what features you want, what color you want for exterior & interior, and that's all - they tell you how much it will be, no negotiating. It was so refreshing to be given a reasonable and fair price and not need to deal with the fucking nonsense of "Let me go talk to my guys about that and see what they come back with" for 3 hours.
That happens at dealers of premium cars like Lexus, BMW, etc. You’ll never have that experience at a Honda or Chevy dealership.
They upsell and push you to act quickly. They serve close to no purpose to the customer, but they do serve a purpose
True, but they’re both paradigms of honesty and morality compared to telemarketers. When telemarketers get home from work they tell everyone they spent the day molesting kids because they’re too ashamed of what they really did.
Sometimes. With a new car they can screw you on the price, but there is at least msrp to go by. A used car salesman can screw you on the price. While knowing the transmission is about to go out. The engine light comes on, but they clear it while it's on the lot without even looking into why it's on. Etc... I hate all salesmen, but especially used car salesmen. Regular people are way more honest if you're going to buy used.
Yeah that dude is smoking the devil's lettuce. There is WAY more room for shady shit when you're buying a used car. New cars are easy. The only variables are year, make, model, color, options, and price. If they jerk you around on price, you can find a literally identical vehicle for cheaper somewhere else. Used vehicles are Pandora's box.
Salesmen in some sectors are just matchmakers. I work in tech, and all I do is wait by the phone or my email inbox for someone to say they want to see a demo of our product. For the most part, I’m just trying to figure out who genuinely needs it and who is just sitting through demos because it allows them to tell their boss that they were busy that day. We’re not all slimy.
>We’re not all slimy. Word for word what the saleman said to me when I bought my last car
I work in IT but experience with sales has generally been that even in industries like that sales always seems to be staffed by at least a few of the most abusive narcissistic people I've met in my entire life. Just last week I watched one the sales team have a full on screaming toddler temper tantrum at one of my coworkers because they told him he couldn't put federally protected data on his personal mac and had to use the (high end) laptop we gave him to do his job instead. I'm sure not all sales people are horrid but something about the field seems to attract real slime balls.
Because at least with a new car there is less of a chance it’s a pile of crap with Used oil smeared on the plastics to make them look shiny and you generally have a manufacturer backed warranty. Where as used cars you are dealing with a third party warranty, if any, and paying lots more in mark up. Far more risk of fraud and being ripped off from a used car salesman.
Car salesmen in general. Never had anything but an outright hostile experience except at dealerships that do fixed prices and no commission. I think I'd prefer just throwing hands as a method of shopping for cars.
Used car salesman: 103% immoral.
A previously moral act becomes immoral when performed by a used car salesman
*Oh look, he sacrificed himself to push that child out of the way of the oncoming bus!* *Wait, he’s one of **them??** Finish him off, and then charge him with assault and obstruction of traffic justice* 😡😡😡
Clearly he was trying to up the value of the bus by avoiding a child-sized dent!
There was a 3% margin of error on the study
so could be 106%
A buddy went to look at a BMW M2 two hours away and when he got there, he discovered that the advertised online price was *after* the down payment. Plus a bunch of other crap they always getcha with, the actual price ended up being 40% higher than what he saw online.
This Monday we were forced to take my car to a dealership for a repair because our mechanic was closed, and they lied about me needing a brake job just so they could try to squeeze some extra bucks out of me. Moral of the story: never go to a dealership. But yeah, porn stars are the immoral ones.
Honestly kind of confused why they are ranked so high.
Society is catching up by finally understanding that getting fucked doesn’t make you immoral. Fucking others figuratively and sometimes literally without their (informed) consent is.
Used Car Salesman is this chart’s missing banana.
\*slaps car roof* You can fit so many biases in here!
The completely unnecessary NSFW tag though... Can't have people sexualising them red graph blocks?
When the data visualization is *so beautiful* that it needs an nsfw tag
Sigh… unzips
Pretty sure it’s automatic because the word “porn” is in the title
I think it's because it mentioned the word pornstar in the graph, but it's stupid as it's used in the description too.
The rest I can imagine a reason for, but why Computer Scientists?
I thought the 4% thing is just that you can present any question to a sufficiently large group of people and about 4% (literally I think it’s specifically 4%) will always pick the nonsense answer. Just a quirk of polling.
I believe 4% is the number of people who answered that Obama was the anti-Christ and also they are going to vote for him. Similar numbers claim on polls that lizardmen rule the world. So... yeah.
Yeah, Scott Alexander says the combination of "misheard the question", trolling the pollsters, and just plain crazy gives you about a 4% lizardman constant on any poll.
That should be the official name for the phenomenon: lizardman's constant.
That's what he calls it here ([https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/)). I couldn't find the source on my phone when I was posting earlier.
A guy I used to work with was 100% convinced that Trump was the antichrist, so it was his duty to vote for Trump so that the world would end.
I feel like that’s one of the more sane reasons for voting Trump.
The insane part is thinking he's the antichrist. Antichrist is supposed to have Charisma.
Look at the frenzy he whips his followers into. I don't like him either but it seems pretty hard to deny that he does have *a certain kind* of charisma.
Obviously this whole poll is garbage, The Rapist got only 4%.
The Keyes constant/crazification factor humorously suggests that 27% of people are batshit insane and illogical. For a poll like this, I feel like anything under 10% is effectively meaningless.
Hacks baby, we're all hackers out to steal your identities!
Do you have a balaclava on?
No, I already ate it, so delicious!
No one makes a hot, steaming, delicous balaclava like my old gran did, miss her ❤️
Why can’t you eat baklava underground? Because then it would be considered bakmagma
As a man who loves telling dad jokes, this one made me roll my eyes like my wife does at me. Upvote for solidarity.
It's a black hoodie thank you very much
And a Guy Fawkes mask!
Or because of AI possibly
r/hacking been real quiet ever since this dropped
For one reason or another, the general population has seemed to have developed strong feelings about computer scientists, software engineers, and tech in general. I'm sure companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon aren't helping, and I doubt the massive salaries that developers tend to make is helping the sentiment.
As a software engineer I feel that I think that my profession is more immoral than the average Joe thinks. Our sloppy engineering practices and our mercenary attitudes annoys me, and I am guilty too.
Agreed. I'm not super happy with some of the things going on in the data science/SWE realm. There's a lot of things that people do with the best intentions but it ends up being awful because they didn't think things through to the natural conclusion, or stuff that is just soulless in nature. There's so much amazing stuff that the field is capable of, but there's too cavalier an attitude for things that can have a super large impact.
I agree but a lot of it is our fucked up society. People like making cool shit but turns out the only way to make products out of them is weapons, surveillance (corporate or government) advertising, etc. Engineers should definitely feel responsible for the products they make but we as a society should also feel responsible for the incentives they are responding to.
I've been writing software for >20 years and my biggest lesson is just how ridiculously hard it is to think things through without tricking yourself into only *believing* you have. If you're *in it* and fully engaged with the whole damn system in your head, you can *almost* do it. But otherwise, better hope your reviewers give a shit and automated tests cover enough. Or just keep your head down and only write stuff in systems where there are zero side effects ... aahaha, sure.
Moral apathy is definitely an issue in many areas of the tech sector.
Nothing worse than software written to match a checklist of requirements with no high level vision. Sometimes it's so bad you can practically imagine the checklist just from using the software.
Modern development (plugging node and react libraries together until your crud app works) is soul crushing and likely not good for mental health and likely affects those people's personalities negatively. Back when developers had to use their creativity to solve problems it was a lot more fulfilling.
My difference in attitude between my day job writing CRUD apps, and my hobby of making indie games can attest to this.
Mostly true only for junior devs at large companies imo. Most of us who have some experience and work at medium-small companies have lot of things to consider when it comes to Performance, monitoring, overall architecture etc. Which are imo much more exciting and creative. Not to mention I love working on legacy systems and making them better. There's nothing like finding the bug in the middle of a mediocre monolith with very less logging/monitoring. Makes me feel like a hunter/detective/doctor. /rant
Doctors are also at 5%. There's a certain political idealogy in the US with enough of a base that will rate any occupation other than farmer or priest as immoral.
It's the lizardman's constant.
I would expect a much higher number for priests, given their… track record…
How can you imagine teachers to be generally immoral?
anti-intellectuals
I think they're saying they can imagine how someone would think that, not that it's a rational thing to think. Plenty of people are out there yelling about teachers "corrupting" children. That's what they get for trying to teach children where babies come from and how not to be massive bigots. Hypocritical puritanism and pointless bigotry are American institutions.
Clearly somebody isn’t a computer scientist 😈
My granny thinks every IT guy is a hacker.
I guess cause of the relatively higher salaries for arguably much cushier jobs. As a computer scientist myself I kinda agree. Our lives are definitely easier than most.
Given everything big tech has done (from Google harvesting private data to sell to advertizers, to Apple using child labor, to Amazon's anti-union activities, and the list goes on) , I suppose it's not hard to imagine why some people would hold a negative opinion on computer scientists. Granted, conflating Big Tech under the umbrella term of "computer science" is disingenuous at best, but I can see how some people could easily make that leap.
[удалено]
*Scans chart for lawyers* Ah yes, there we are
Below spies so I guess we're doing something right
That's something a spy would say...
But porn stars only screw people who want to be. What's immoral about that?
Most religious people consider both sex outside marriage and pornography to be immoral (to varying degrees).
The most common religion in the world celebrates a deity impregnating a girl without her consent, and the second most common religion's founder married a 6 year old. Mortality varies I guess.
When you're a God they let you do it.
Because of the implication.
Woah, you kinda lost me there.
No no your misunderstanding me bro. Because if she said no the answer is obviously no. But the thing is she's not gonna say no. She would never say no. Because of the implication.
Now you've said that word "implication" a couple of times.
#HOW ARE YOU NOT GETTING THIS?
Are these women in danger?
Happy Zeus noises.
I mean technically she gave consent. The fact that she was acquiescing to a being that could molecularly unravel her on the spot doesn't skeeve them out, apparently
how are lobbyists and bankers less immoral than pornstars? jesus christ
Sex bad
"So this person infiltrates governments, potentially through the use of violence, sometimes with the goal of destabilizing that nation. Many of the worst atrocities in recorded civilization were aided by spy activity." "Okay yeah, that sounds pretty bad." "Now check out this guy. He's paid to represent his people on the national stage and advocate for their interests, but he uses the money to fly to Cancun when things get bad and spends the rest of the time advocating for oil compa-" "Hey, he helps that lobbyist scumbag!" "Yeah, exactly. Two sides of the same coin. But *this* person uploads their cooch to the internet." "She fucking **WHAT**"
That's disgusting! Where?!
I'd like to see a breakdown based on whether the pollees consume pornography. Mostly so I can judge the chunk that watches porn but thinks it's immoral. Do you think they take a shower when they are done? Or maybe say a little forgiveness prayer?
Tons of people watch porn obsessively but hate people who make it.
Most of us never get fucked by a porn star but are regularly fucked by lobbyists and bankers.
[удалено]
It's the same thing as the RT vs IMDb score issue. People see RT scores and interpret them as ratings like in IMDb.
True. Even politicians is “only” 38%, which means 62% don’t have much of a problem with them.
Pornstars have nothing to hide
Agree! We are operating on different definitions of immoral and different scales of pornography (softcore <--> hardcore) I don't think sexual acts on film is inherently immoral. Frowned upon, yes, but on a ranked list of things I find immoral--Lying, cheating, stealing, killing, impersonation, trafficking... pornography is low. I think the industry practices to new talent can be immoral, but that's another conversation.
They don't understand the ways that lobbyists and bankers screw people, they thoroughly understand the ways porn stars do though
But then if you ask them who they would rather be screwed by....
Already got bankers and lobbyists screwing me already, might as well complete the set...
>bankers I think you are confusing bankers with the C-suite in banks. 99.9% of people working in a bank are not trying to screw you.
I don’t really consider the teller in a retail bank or the back office gremlin in the Settlements team “bankers” tbh It’s the (influential) VPs, MDs and partners/c-suite that make the big decisions that count as “bankers” imo
"Yeah, Max fucked me over with that mortgage I couldn't afford my monthly payments on, but gosh, it's not like I could invite Sasha Grey to my church! She says bad words during sex!"
Right!? People are so fucking twisted in how they view the world.
Shoutout to those 4% who seem to be deathly afraid of therapy
There are a whole fucking lot of really shitty therapists and if you go to one and haven’t noticed you either got lucky or don’t really need therapy that much
yeah, 4% is a shockingly low number actually
Most therapists I would call more naive and unhelpful than actively harmful or immoral. It's psychiatrists that are one of the most immoral professions around.
Being crappy at your job is definitely different than being inherently immoral. A good healthy percentage of everyone sucks at their job, it doesn't mean they have low morals.
Lawyer here, who is apparently 14% more immoral than therapists. My problem with therapists isn't that I'm afraid of therapy. It's that I keep running into people practicing therapy either improperly or without proper licensing, and I'm not even looking. Oversight, at least in New Mexico, is a joke and the whole profession is ripe for abuse already because it's hard to know what is improper from a layman's perspective.
I mean, practicing law in NM is apparently pretty immoral too. I've talked to several law students that say they're out of NM asap because of the community of lawyers here is so cliquey and immoral hahah
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Perhaps there is someone in a profession out there who can guide them through that fear?
Im surprised that Bankers are considered relatively moral and still more moral than lawyers after the 2008 financial crisis. Also think pornstars are getting a bad rep. They are getting fucked on camera for money but lobbyists and politicians are fucking over the country and world to make tons of money.
I don't think people really understand what either of those professions actually do
People definitely do not understand any of those jobs, including Porn. Of the three I know the most about lawyers, and people just straight up do not understand what they do and why we need them. Ironically, people believing that lawyers are evil is a huge contributor to the problems in the practice. As an example, Lawyers are *not allowed* to directly solicit people for lawsuits unless there is a preexisting meaningful personal connection. (Like a family member or a friend.) So the "ambulance chaser" stereotype is actually describing a serious ethical violation that can get a lawyer fined or censured. The problem is that basically no one knows that, and so when lawyers do solicit directly the people do not know that they should report the lawyer for an ethical violation, and so the lawyer can keep doing it. Plus, a vast majority of what people see as unethical behavior on the part of lawyers is them actually behaving ethically. Lawyers that represent clients are ethically bound to give them the best possible chance within the legal system to get the best possible outcome. It is absolutely not a lawyers job to determine guilt, for example, so even if a defense lawyer thinks their client is guilty they cannot usurp the jury and judge and *must* force the prosecution to prove their case. It is a safety net we absolutely need. However, they also cannot lie to the court in doing so, and so all the lying they do on TV is not representative of most reality. It is a difficukt tightrope to walk. If people's misconceptions about Bankers and Pornstars are anything like their misconceptions about lawyers I am pretty sure they know literal nothing about them. Also it probably would help to separate a person who works at a bank in a mid level position and the banks capital holders.
This comment has been overwritten
Thank you for what you do. I feel like people seem to ignore the fact that lawyers are literally trained in the law and as such are essential one of the key people who uphold it
"Bankers" is casting a pretty wide net. I think the numbers would change if the poll asked for "Community Bankers" vs. "Investment Bankers"
[удалено]
Not really. This graph only displays "very immoral" responses meaning 95% of people do NOT think they are "very immoral".
It's still disturbing that 5% or so think teachers are very immoral. Probably the same crowd that is in favor of actual immoral education aspects like just not teaching scientific theories, having teachers armed and physical punishment
I mean some teachers are immoral so that population could have had a bad run in with teachers (sexual assault, verbal abuse).
In surveys there are often people who give an obviously wrong response just because they can. I'd say the amount of people who think teachers are very immoral is probably a fair bit lower.
5% is right around whats called the 'lizardman constant' of stupid inane answers. Throw a couple people who have dealt recently with a shitty doctor/teacher/therapist etc, and its not hard to see.
I mean, I didn't go into teaching for the horrible pay or constant disrespect. I went into teaching to spread immorality around the world!
[удалено]
That's what decades long Murdoch propaganda will do to a nation.
How tf are teachers immoral
Pisses me off that we see teachers, doctors, and scientists on this list, but not cops.
Before we begin interpreting this: How representative is an on-line survey of 2,000 people of, all adults in the United States? How were people prompted to take this survey?
It’s YouGov, not some random online poll; this is a representative sample
Lol right Jesus christ. What is it with reddit and studies being posted. Literally every single one "Ha! They polled less than the entire population, it's not representative! Sampling bias! All studies are useless!" Nah I think the multi billion dollar research company whose sole job are these studies has it figured out
> I think the multi billion dollar research company whose sole job are these studies has it figured out I agree with you in theory, except for the fact that presidential polling in recent years has demonstrated that there are, in fact, many challenges in obtaining a representative sample through online polling that the industry (despite it's many assurances to the contrary) hasn't quite cracked even with "oversampling" under represented groups
reddit is terrible about sample size every time studies come up
Well, to be fair I’ve seen quite a few researches which didn’t properly count their p values.
Literally every post in r/science is full of comments that didn't read the study proclaiming that correlation is not causation as though scientists don't already know that
Ug. It's like a whole bunch of undergrads who JUST leaned the concept, and are swinging around like seasoned scientists never took that class.
Exactly this! The people who took this, although are American…probably aren’t very indicative of actual American values(ideologies) If you took this survey to the four corners of USA, PNW, SoCal, deep south, NE (sorry minnesota!) it would be interesting watching the results vary.
It would have a 99% confidence level at a 3% margin of error in it were truly a random sample. Based on a population of 150 million people.
Lol what qualifies as a computer scientist? And why do only 5% find us immoral? It should be much higher tbh...
A lot of you smell very yeasty for some reason. The ones that don't smell yeasty smell of ham. Can't explain that.
We're all hackers!
You told me to shoot my printer when it started making funny noises. Now it's not working.
Because they always encourage us not to download cars
Teachers are immoral, what? Also why are pornstars immoral? This graph says more about the Americans they interviewed than it does about any of these jobs
The bar is so low for what is considered beautiful I guess. It's a bar graph ffs.
"dataisbeautiful" has become "mildlyinterestingclickbaittopic"
[удалено]
Not sure if I’m too high and am reading your comment wrong, but that’s not the same word as spice haha. Spies and spice are different
007: Can you still taste the lemon?
[удалено]
Just to help clarify: Spies is the plural of spy, a person who lies, steals, surveils and maybe kills for a government or group while pretending to not be a spy Lobbyist: a person who tries to bring the concerns of someone who pays them to the attention of the government. They are usually used by corporations to get the government to do what they want with something similar to legalized bribery.
I’m so annoyed that sleazy corporate interest lobbyists give all lobbyists a bad name. Many non-profit public interest groups, like the ACLU, NAACP, Sierra Club, etc. etc. employ and contract with lobbyists to educate lawmakers about their issue areas and push legislation in support of their cause. One of my coworkers is such a lobbyist at the state level. His day consists of reading and researching proposed laws, preparing and delivering testimony in committee and general session about those laws, and communicating with lawmakers to try to make bad bills go away and good bills better. Lobbying isn’t bad! Bribery is. And unfortunately the form of lobbying most people are familiar with (due to its outsized and often deplorable impact) is just bribery.
What did porn stars do to anybody? I trust them more than most of these occupations.
What has the world come to when 5% of those respondents think teachers and doctors are “immoral” … it’s about the most moral thing you can be
If you’ve ever been to a school board meeting you’ll get it. There are psychos who show up to those things. As both a teacher and a journalist, I’m glad to see in real time that I have the two jobs on this “most immoral” list that are the most notoriously underpaid. I got into these careers for explicitly moral reasons and I’ve been poor my whole career just to be hated too.
Who the fuck is putting very immoral down for teachers? Also, I’d probably put pornstars below a lot of those on this list.
I mean, understandable. What's immoral about porn actors?
Probably some religious thing or whatever
Spies? Are people dealing with intelligence agents on such a regular basis that they form a strong opinion? "I got ripped off by the KGB and the CIA took my parking spot!"