[hamuraijack]

If you're trying to build a tool to help deepen connections, it shouldn't be around sharing things that you do. We've tried that model for the last 15 years and it's clearly failed. I think what people crave these days is human connection through interactions. I think the biggest problem with friendships these days is people want friends without all the work that goes with it.

[Frost1x]

>I think the biggest problem with friendships these days is people want friends without all the work that goes with it.

We have a very convenience driven "me first" culture. While it's healthy to always keep in mind your needs, aside from maybe you close family/friends, few will, you also have to consider other people and learn to reach agreeable compromises.

Sometimes it means driving somewhere you don't want to and spending half a day to make someone else happy when you could spend that same half a day making sure you exclusively are happy. Social relationships, maybe most human relationships in general, are about reaching reasonable compromises that doesn't always put self above all. We seem to be moving in a direction where we put self above all though and you get a lot of lonely people who pamper themselves. Some may enjoy that sort of lifestyle but not me, it seems very lonely.

[toshk]

It seems to me that we the strongest bonds are formed out of necessity.

We bond with people in difficult situations when we need protections and are able to protect.

I've noticed friends who are born in places like South Africa, or Russia are much intenser with friendships.

My theory is that they really have to trust eachother because they have no trust in the system.

Where I grew up, trust in system is strong and it seems people don't need to rely on eachother.

It's not so simple, and of course most people still bond deeply depending on personality and upbringing. But it's why I think most Western societies are so individual.

[mockingbirdy]

There are some studies which reveal possible connections between wealth, compassion and how generous people are. [1] and [2] for articles about studies like [3]. I see some shortcomings in some of the studies (looking at drivers of luxury cars is not informative about all types of wealthy people, just the ones who care about spending it this way which self-selects a certain kind of person), but I think that the general direction could be informative for more research. There are also studies about cognitive costs of empathy [4] which may relate to this.

[1]: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/save/why-poor-pe...

[2]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-wealth-reduce...

[3]: https://www.pnas.org/content/109/11/4086.short

[4]: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/xge-xge0000595.pd...

[bserge]

If you do that, you have a high chance of being an idiot. You'll be the idiot who puts others first, always helps them, gets nothing in return and then gets abandoned. Hence most people are playing it safe and care about themselves first.

[Viliam1234]

You could use a "tit for tat" strategy, where you do something nice for the other person first, and later you ask them for help with something small you need. Those who don't reciprocate, they get on your blacklist and you no longer do nice things for them. With those who reciprocate, you gradually escalate.

But this requires some bookkeeping, that strategies like "always help others" and "never help others" do not.

Seems like many people start with "always help others" as a combination of idealism and... I was tempted to say laziness, but probably the idea just never occured to them. After seeing that people do not reciprocate, they burn out and switch to "never help others". Or maybe it's not even the case that most people do not reciprocate, but rather that there are a few abusers who notice the opportunity and start exploiting the naive person. (So the naive person's statistics would be like "I helped others 100 times, and was only helped 7 times myself", but they forget to notice that of those 100 times they helped someone, 90 times they helped the same person who never reciprocated.)

[DiggyJohnson]

Surely its the middle-ground between your point and what you perceive GP's point to be?

[mkr-hn]

I've seen an incredible outpouring of selfless support for others during the pandemic, and quite a bit before that. Maybe the problem is the people you're surrounded by and pay attention to, not culture in general.

[bserge]

Verbal/written or actual support?

[mkr-hn]

Money, transportation, housing, referrals/interviews/jobs, a good time with safe people away from an unsafe but currently inescapable situation. Sometimes verbal or written, but that can be just what someone needs. I've personally received a few lifelines.

[simplify]

While those things are great, they're also one-and-done transactions. All the other person needs to do is say thanks and be appreciative.

Building friendships is actually harder. It takes more time and more effort, on many separate occasions. And there's no guarantee it'll be worth it, either.

[lotsofpulp]

I wonder if a shared struggle/experience is needed to forge strong bonds. Not just going out, eating/drinking/dancing over and over, but a series of ups and downs.

Maybe individuals becoming less dependent on others due to a combination of earning power and internet facilitating ease of accessing information and communicating with literally anyone and not just those around you changed the parameters of life. Hence relationships are less likely to experience the conditions required to create the necessary bonds.

[Viliam1234]

Yeah. At some moment in my life I noticed that there are two types of "friends": First is a person you can have fun with... and that is all you can ever do with them. Second is a person you can have fun with, but you can also discuss serious things with, and help each other. As long as you only have fun, these two types seem similar. You typically learn the difference only when something bad happens to you... then the first type of friend disappears.

You can filter friends by putting yourself together in difficult situations on purpose. Like, take a long trip together, some problems will happen and you can see how the other person reacts. Or volunteer for an organization that helps others; the friends you find there are already filtered for their willingness to help others. (This isn't a 100% certain strategy; there are some abusers who know that others use this algorithm, so they go there fishing for easy victims to exploit. But most of lazy and selfish people would refuse to try anything like this.)

If your life is all about fun, then you are at risk of being surrounded by people who are your friends only as long as the fun lasts.

[svachalek]

I think "social" media helped to kill a lot of social interaction, by making it easy to go through the motions and keep up appearances more efficiently than actually living a rich social life.

I read somewhere that given a choice between what we know is good and what's convenient, people will choose convenience almost every time, leading to a modern world that feels how a pre-packaged peanut butter and jelly sandwich tastes. It's obviously a subjective statement but I've found it explains a lot about everything.

[Abishek_Muthian]

I agree, Friendship is an investment. I like my friends, I respect their friendship but I hate the social construct of having to constantly keep in touch to keep that friendship alive.

Hi how are you...

I'm good how are you...

I'm good too...

Then next 1 hour spent on each others problems which usually neither could do anything about.