Someone delays a reply, and your attention becomes trapped. Someone questions your competence, and you rush to prove yourself. A woman becomes distant, and you immediately increase your effort. A superior gives you vague praise, and you accept more responsibility without asking what you gain in return. A friend crosses a boundary, apologizes convincingly, and you restore the same access before his behavior has changed.

You believe you are making independent decisions. But often, someone else creates the emotion and waits for you to react. They do not need to control you directly. They only need to know what triggers you. Your fear of rejection. Your need to be understood. Your desire for approval. Your inability to tolerate silence. Your hope that people will eventually repay your loyalty. Once someone identifies the emotion that controls you, your behavior becomes predictable. And predictable people are easy to position against.

You explain when silence would protect you. You forgive when distance would teach more. You chase when withdrawal would reveal the truth. You accept bad terms because walking away feels uncomfortable. You reveal your intentions because you want people to understand that you mean well. Then you act surprised when they use that information against you.

The problem is not that everyone around you is secretly plotting. The problem is that you were taught to judge people by their words instead of their incentives. You listen to the apology and ignore the repeated behavior. You believe the promise and ignore what the person gains by making it. You focus on what they claim to feel and ignore what they consistently choose.

People will tell you they value honesty, then punish you for telling an inconvenient truth. They will praise loyalty, then leave when remaining loyal becomes expensive. They will speak about fairness while negotiating for every advantage they can get. They will call you selfish when your boundaries interfere with their access to you. This is human nature.You can complain about it. You can pretend it does not exist. Or you can study it.

Study how status changes behavior. How incentives shape loyalty. How narcissists manufacture confusion. How emotions make you abandon your own interests. How threats become useless when you are unwilling to enforce them. How people test your boundaries through small violations before attempting larger ones. How your need for a particular outcome weakens your position before the negotiation even begins. This is why observation matters.

You do not need to become paranoid. You need to become more difficult to predict through your emotions and more attentive to what other people's choices reveal. Stop reacting to what people say. Study what their incentives and repeated choices reveal.

"What do you want to prove with what you are going to say & which will be the final accomplishment of our conversation?" Say this while you are calm,with steady voice and looking him/her to his eyes.In our company we used to have some frequently issues with a devious co-worker of me.After many hours of deep thought for what to do so to force him to just stop his annoying behaviour,i ended up just saying to him these words when he once again starts telling his own @hitty stuff.If only guys you could see his expressions!!! (Sorry for mediocre English).

Canada should officially rename Lake Erie “Lake America” in response to the U.S. federal government renaming Lake Ontario “Lake America.”

Doing nothing risks allowing the new name to become normalized over time. Even if most people reject “Lake America” today, years of seeing it on U.S. government documents, maps, websites, news reports, and other services could gradually make it seem like an ordinary alternative name for Lake Ontario.

Once a name becomes established through repetition, getting rid of it becomes much harder.

Canada therefore shouldn’t simply hope the rename disappears. It should make the new name difficult to use.

The best way would be deliberate ambiguity: rename Lake Erie “Lake America” too. Then “Lake America” would refer to Lake Ontario under U.S. terminology and Lake Erie under Canadian terminology.

But if the Canadian government refuses to do this officially, Canadians could do unofficially what the government wouldn’t.

Use “Lake America” to mean Lake Erie on social media, websites, memes, videos, merchandise, privately owned signs, and anywhere else people can legally choose their own terminology.

Then whenever someone says:

“There’s a storm over Lake America.”

“Pollution is increasing in Lake America.”

“We’re vacationing on Lake America.”

The obvious question becomes: Which Lake America? Ontario or Erie?

That is the sabotage.

A geographic name is supposed to clearly identify a place. If the U.S. government uses “Lake America” for Lake Ontario while a widespread Canadian grassroots movement uses exactly the same name for Lake Erie, the term becomes inherently ambiguous.

Instead of passively allowing “Lake America” to become more familiar and entrenched with every passing year, Canadians would be giving journalists, companies, mapmakers, and ordinary people a practical reason to avoid it and keep using the unambiguous names “Lake Ontario” and “Lake Erie.”

Ideally, the Canadian government would do this officially. If it won’t, Canadians could start doing it themselves. The longer Canada simply leaves the U.S. rename uncontested in practice, the greater the chance that “Lake America” stops sounding strange and starts sounding normal.

Now that Trump has renamed Lake Ontario “Lake America” for U.S. federal purposes, Canada should rename Lake Erie “Lake America” too.

The point would be deliberate ambiguity. Whenever someone mentions “Lake America,” you would have to ask whether they mean Lake Ontario under U.S. terminology or Lake Erie under Canadian terminology.

That makes the new name bad at its most basic job: identifying a place.

Canada can’t stop the U.S. from using the name, but it can make it inconvenient enough that everyone else keeps saying “Lake Ontario” and “Lake Erie.”

Lately, I’ve become curious about a question:
How does persuasion actually work?
Not just political persuasion. Human persuasion.
Why do we trust some people and not others?
Why do we change our minds?
Why do we sometimes refuse to change our minds when the evidence changes?
And how far back does all of this go?
I started wondering whether persuasion begins long before politics, advertising, religion, or social media—perhaps even before humans.
So I’m doing what curious people do when they realize they don’t actually know the answer:
I’m researching it.
I’m reading the psychology, history, anthropology, animal cognition, and communication research. And I’m trying to follow one rule:
Curiosity first. Evidence second. Conclusions last.
I know I bring my own experiences and biases to the questions. We all do. My background in mediation taught me that the goal isn’t to pretend those biases don’t exist. It’s to notice them, question them, and test our assumptions against the evidence.
Sometimes the evidence may confirm what I thought.
I hope sometimes it proves me wrong.
I’m going to share some of what I discover along the way—not to tell anyone what to think, but because I think learning how we are persuaded might help all of us become a little better at deciding for ourselves.
⚙️ One question at a time.

i am waiting patiently until the right chance comes up while i manage a tough three weeks conflict, day by day and i know everything passes away so i try to keep my flow and open up to new opportunities and new views when i have space, who is on this spot right now maybe you can share your experience how you manage?

Hey there I'm kinda new to cybersec and very interested in initial access, since social engineering is a big part of it I red a couple of books about the psychology behind it and learned some of the tools, now my question is: how do I practice it if it's illegal to impersonate someone else and steal their information?

Contitions change any time conditions and I decide to adapt and handle wisely while playing my cards right to keep tension and undermine enemies who decide to don't invest on the cause, so who is on this spot maybe you can sahre your experience and tell how you manage it

So to start off, for a year, I had the group I would always sit with at lunch during school that I found on day one. I always felt included, felt great after every meal, we were all laughing and having an amazing time. However, close after the start of my junior year, things got strange. The people from the table started splitting (mainly because of getting gfs), but when they were just sitting with other dudes, it never felt planned. I felt myself seeking these people out instead of talking to them about a conversation that would carry on in lunch later. They then got back together basically (minus like two best friends), but they unified with another friend group in the grade basically. However, whenever I sat with this friend group, the conversation did not flow like it used to. I never felt included, and some of the kids would only talk to me in a condescending way. I get that friends drift apart, and that's probably what happened, but it felt intentional with these new people. That all is a simplification of the context for my situation. I'm planning tomorrow (as a senior) to sit alone at lunch. While this is a thing that happens of course, because I used to have a group that I sat with, I'm afraid that anyone who knows that and what we had, then sees me sitting alone will think of it as a social taboo to try to be friends with me. (good news so far since I stopped trying to sit with the unified friend group none of the kids who condescended on me have said anything like that since) But I'll update after the lunch, but I would like some advice for future situations like that if anyone has any.

Confession: I used to scam on roblox and minecraft servers for ingame items (USED TO that was 5+ years ago) and I would say I am decently skilled at social engineering.

I asked chatgpt randomly on how one can make money from social engineering and it told me about sales and stuff bla bla, but then it mentioned that some companies pay you to use social engineering and hack them??

what on earth does that mean and how do i sign up!!

The Mental Health, Wellbeing and Lived Experiences Study

Theresia Bedard, a PhD candidate at Lakehead University that is working with Dr. Beth Visser, is seeking participants for her dissertation project.

In this study we are examining the lived experiences of people who have experience or victimization from an individual with high psychopathic traits. We are seeking anyone that has this lived experience, whether the perpetrator was or is a spouse, family member, partner, co-worker, friend, acquaintance, neighbour or stranger. We are seeking the lived experiences of men, women, and gender-diverse individuals to share your story.

Our research consists of two studies. In the first study, you will complete questionnaires related to your victimization experience from the individual with high psychopathic traits, the potential warning signs, victimization history (e.g., prior physical or sexual abuse), and the impact the experience had on you. Once you finish the survey, you will be invited to participate in the second study (optional), which will consist of 12 questions requiring a written response regarding your lived experience with the individual with high psychopathic traits. If you decide to participate in study 2, please be aware that you will be required to provide us with your email to access it, and you may wish to use an email account that only you have access to.

Please be advised that whether you choose to participate in the study, withdraw, or skip questions you do not want to answer, that you acknowledge that answering some of these questions may be emotionally taxing on you. Despite the potential for an emotional toll the survey questions have, you may find the process of sharing your experience is therapeutic for you. In addition to the resources we provide, you may want to consider following-up with a counsellor for further support.

You are also encouraged to have your own snacks and drinks while you take the survey, and be aware that they are estimated to take 45 minutes to complete.

If you are interested in participating and would like to read or find out more about it, click here to access the survey:

https://lakeheadhbs.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bKEq1vOVdBJMrjw

Look, I have autism too. I get it. You want to be a better social engineer. IDK maybe you think it will be beneficial for you to learn persuasion and SocEng. And it will if you do it right.

But here’s the problems:

1. most other autists on here want to be Machiavellians. Firstly, that’s not required to be a social engineer. Secondly, trying to be something you’re not as if you have a dark triad personality you don’t have will just make people (especially women) hate you. It’s the opposite of persuasive. It’s also pathetic.

2. Dark psych books are NOT good for SocEng. I know you think they are but they aren’t. Most of them are written by sociopaths who want to sell you cheesy manipulation tactics that don’t work and don’t hold up to science.

A better path for a beginner is start with HTWFIP and take a year or at least six months to master the social skills behind that at meetups. Then you can pick the next step, which is pick up a book by an author who ACTUALLY knows persuasion, like Hadnagy, Mitnick, Warren, or Belfort OR read other sales books and master that material at work or wherever. Another path is to get training from Social Engineer LLC.

But what will not work is reading shitty dark psych books written by someone who is out to make money because YOU are the one who got manipulated not everyone else at that point.

Ethical disclaimer: I am well aware of the ways this could be used less ethically and in a more exploitative way, I have seen it many many times over in my former workplace personally.
If you are also aware of such approaches and want to make similar suggestions, please do not. I firstly do not wish to employ such tactics, and secondly (more importantly) I imagine there might be some less experienced people who will use your advice on this post to work on their own skills and I did my best to keep the details of the dirtier tactics away from them lest they come up with their own questionable approaches and slip into the habit of using them once they realize the effectiveness, so try not to give them silly ideas either, please.

For context, I used to work as a salesman in travel agency for a few months selling trips to people; as part of the training process I was taught some elementary tactics for guiding the conversations and was further instructed during coaching after actual real-life interactions. One of the most important skills that was taught to me was how to apply pressure on clients to eliminate uncertainty.

Honestly, I did not take it as seriously as I should have in the beginning, and it is not some kind of nuclear weapon for social interactions, but when someone is really on the edge of making a decision it can really be the final nail in the coffin.

Even when selling relatively expensive trips (2k, 4k or even above 10k dollars), if the customer shows interest in the offer but is stuck on something like "I'm interested but I don't know if there might be better offers hidden" or "I'm not entirely sure if this is the right thing and need to think it over later", just hitting them with "the prices might go up in a few minutes let alone by the time you've finished research, so consider it's either now or never" will make all the difference. If you present them the stakes like that and create a feeling of pressure due to time limited offers the maybes will turn into quite a few "let's do it" ridiculously quickly. Truly, I've had people who sounded like they will never come to a decision say "yes" instantly as soon as I presented the stakes, I still remember how stupefied I was the first time I tried it and seeing how well it worked.
(Interestingly, once you do this it becomes much more noticeable when it's done to you, most prominently in mobile games with time limited offers or on sites like Temu.)

Since then I've tried implementing similar tactics in mundane interactions in private life even with non-monetary or inconsequential stakes. As a very trivial example, I was offering my favorite cheese as a snack to friends at a picnic, one friend seemed interested but just put it off for later if ever, I simply hit her with "it's real good, others will also like it and there will be none left real soon, so you better be quick" and it was simply like a switch was flipped and she conceded instantly.
The stakes were obviously absolutely negligible but the point of convincing her very swiftly where "untactical" offering failed still stands.

Obviously, it's far from a guaranteed tactic; with customers there are always some who simply see through the tactic and take more time to calculate their next decision better, while some simply aren't interested enough and aren't bothered by the consequences, with similar scenarios in private interactions.

Ever since the job I've been looking for ways to effectively employ similar tactics in all manners of social interactions to more effectively lead to results I desire, but I am still struggling to formalize an approach, learn how strongly to use it and most importantly properly notice and create scenarios where it is usable.
Thus my question would be: do you guys have any relevant experiences/advice/personal examples that would fill some gaps in my knowledge and guide me forward, or direct me to some resources that would be of equal help. Any contribution is appreciated!

Do call actually know What its for ? Is it for social interaction or how to avoid cyber attacks ?

I’ve been thinking about something recently. I’ve had a few experiences where I initially had a good rapport with someone, but over time they started constantly making fun of me or turning me into the easy target of jokes.

I came across the idea that people tend to keep doing this when they sense some kind of weakness, but I don’t necessarily think that means the person actually has a weakness. Sometimes it could simply be that they notice you don’t push back, you laugh things off, or they realize that certain reactions make the jokes more entertaining for them.

I’m trying to understand the psychology behind it rather than just take it personally. What are the general things that make someone more likely to become a target, and how can you set boundaries early without becoming aggressive or changing your personality?

The first few years were rough. I had not really anyone close to me, and was extremely quiet. Maybe I was lucky, but some people from my school came to me to bug and pick on me (in a friendly way I think), and while it didn't help me pick up on social cues or anything, it helped me not to be alone.

The next year was of interest. I began with texting. Texting a lot. Developing texting methods and patterns, like saying "woa" or ":P" a lot. I picked up on respect, such as "excuse me" and "oh sorry," but my voice was always too low for anyone to hear.

The last year was striking. During the summer before school, I came to many realizations. A few examples are placing myself in the exact frame of another person, viewing myself from a third person standpoint when I talk. In addition to that, I began to talk as if I was texting. It helped me kind of "merge" with the social aspect of life. And thus, I began to talk more confidently, loudly, and most importantly, I began to use more HUMOR! I noticed how other's use humor, commenting small things on someone else's joke or simply laughing along. But, but -that's not all!

I just started realizing that it makes the people around me uncomfortable if I purposely avoid them. I imagine that if I were in their position, and if I saw someone walking towards me, then the opposite way... Now how would I feel?

Of course, there is the caveat of "avoiding them discreetly," but why do that when I still have many years of my life left? Many, many years. This thought began with "What if I just went to other public high schools temporarily and just talked whatever I wanted to experiment because I would likely never see those people again?" And then became, "Ah... My school is the exact same. I will likely never see the majority of the people here... So let's just wing it."

oh haha. and this was never a smooth road. Lots of bumps. My "friends" called me whatever they wanted because I would never fight back. They called me "femboy" "princess" etc. and I'm a guy. Just fyi. I still don't fight back. But I also don't encourage it either. I like to slide in passive aggressive comments now rather than just standing entirely idly by.

Another bump was texting. It took So, So long to develop texting and manifest it while I was talking. I took many phrases from other people, like "umpteenth, confuzzled, yowch" and just kept adding and adding (I also try to stay away from using acronyms 24/7). I even have a personal list I compiled all of my values and words onto just for memorization. That may be weird. But hey! It worked.

I feel like I'm missing an important part of this puzzle but whatever.

Most advice about reading people is either "just pay attention" or a list of rules that fall apart on contact with reality. Crossed arms means defensive, except when the room is cold. A pause means hesitation, except when someone is thinking. The rules are the wrong unit — you can memorise every one and still freeze in the actual conversation.

What seems to work better is reps. Person-perception accuracy is measurable, it varies enormously between people, and training studies show it improves when you make a call and immediately find out how you did. So I built something to make the calls on: Spot the Cue (spotthecue.com).

Short scenarios in text, photo, video or a chat thread. You read the situation, pick what you think is going on, then get told what the strongest read was, what was reasonable but partial, and what would have been a misread. Seven tracks: tone and wording, facial and body cues, subtext and indirectness, group dynamics, conflict and repair, saying it out loud, and pressure and deception.

The part I care most about is that it doesn't pretend to certainty. Cues are probabilistic, context and culture flip their meaning, and every entry in the glossary is paired with a "but not always." No 93% of communication is nonverbal — that stat is a misreading of a narrow experiment. The goal is better calibrated guesses, not mind reading.

Disclosure, per rule 8: it's mine and it has a paid tier. Level 1 of all seven tracks is free and fully scored, no account, no ads. Past that it's $19.99 once, no subscription. Mods, remove if that crosses the line.

What I'd like from this sub: tell me where a scenario's "best read" is wrong, unfair, or something that would never happen to an adult in real life. That's the feedback I can't get from people who already agree with me. I'll be in the comments. If you think the full version of this app would genuinely help you or someone you care about and the price is what's stopping you, email [support@spotthecue.com](mailto:support@spotthecue.com) and mention this thread.

Whenever I meet someone new, I get really stiff, nervous, and uncomfortable. My anxiety spikes and I just freeze up inside. I've tried the usual calming techniques deep breathing, telling myself to relax, etc. but honestly nothing seems to make a real difference in the moment.

Has anyone found techniques that actually work for this? Not just theory, but stuff you've genuinely tested and that helped. Would really appreciate real experiences,