I was curious to pin down the definition of Machiavellian:

> Manipulation & Deceit: Using charm, lies, and calculated moves to influence others.

> Lack of Empathy: A cold, detached, and unemotional demeanor that disregards the feelings of others.

> Strategic Long-Term Planning: Unlike impulsive psychopaths, high-Machs are patient, planning, and can delay gratification to ensure success.

> Cynical Worldview: Believing that people are inherently weak, untrustworthy, and that "the ends justify the means".

> Low Affect: Possessing limited emotional experience, often leading to a detached, "puppet-master" role rather than seeking the spotlight.

The only traits that seem bad are the lying and lack of empathy. The rest seem neutral (low emotional experience is something we hackers tend to identify with), sensible (random people tend to be untrustworthy), or admirable (delayed gratification).

Using charm and calculated moves to influence others isn’t a bad thing. It’s the basis of flattery.

I wish there was a positive version of Machiavellian which cut the lies and lack of empathy. Those are genuinely bad.

▲

fc417fc802 11 hours ago | parent [-]

> Using charm and calculated moves to influence others isn’t a bad thing. It’s the basis of flattery.

Flattery doesn't have to be calculated.

As to calculated moves, distinct things can fit the same labels. Intent, context, and execution are all important.

▲

lostmsu 10 hours ago | parent [-]

I would argue that flattery without calculation is just poorly calculated flattery.

Same applies to many other traits in the list. Low achievements people lie right and left just as well. Are cynical when convenient, yada yada.

Basically, the list says that these 30s are just like an average Joe, but smart. Which should be a surprise to no one.

	▲	estearum 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		No, because smart people realize they are playing an iterated game and that behaving in a way that people identify as Machiavellian is actually suboptimal in the long run. So they're smart enough to be calculated and stupid enough not to be so calculated that they look untrustworthy.
	▲	fc417fc802 9 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They're only the same thing if you ignore intent. Not everyone lies or is cynical when convenient. Skill, rate of success, and personal ethics are all orthogonal concepts. Above all, intent matters. I do not treat someone who I perceive to be manipulative the same as I would other people.