Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 275 posts

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#231

Post by circlefavshape »

bobbyi_settv wrote: post #129
devchix wrote: post #9

A recent episode of 99% Invisible: Play Mountain looked at how the playground got to be safe and boring. "A two-year-old boy named Frank Nelson was climbing a 12-foot-tall slide in a Chicago park when he slipped through a railing and hit his head so hard that it caused permanent brain damage. The park system of Chicago was sued and had to pay out millions of dollars to Nelson’s family. At that time, in the late 70s,…

Maybe it's okay though? Is there real evidence to back up the sentiment that kids have less fun (or get less exercise, develop less physical skills, etc.) in modern "safe" playgrounds?

THIS!

The playgrounds my kids played in when they were little were a thousand times cooler than the crappy playgrounds I had growing up

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#232

Post by wongarsu »

geggam wrote: post #229
hexane360 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems really similar to techniques I've heard about in road design. A lot of safety improvements are pretty well compensated by changes in people's behavior. For example, if you make shoulders and lanes wider, people will feel like they're going slower and speed up to compensate. Even with things you wouldn't expect, like the dedicated/third brake light made mandatory for cars in 1986, there were significant cha…

Your idea works until you look at something like the autobahn. Having driven on it I can say what I feel the main factor to safety is driver behavior. I see more turn signals used and when someone is going faster the other folks tend to move out of their way. Its more of a social mindset that creates safe roads than anything IMO.

Driver behaviour on the Autobahn is not some accident. Germany has the most expensive drivers licence in the world due to the number of lessions you have to take to even be allowed to take the exams, with most people opting in to even more lessons to pass the exams. To pass the practical exam you have to drive pretty much perfectly (a small number of people never pass). So everybody knows how to drive correctly and has it drilled into them at least once in their life how important that is. Obviously with routine some things slip, but nobody wants to get rear-ended by a car going 120 mph on the Autobahn either.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#233

Post by standinator »

In my primary school we had some poles in the shape of a right triangle (with one of the legs being formed by the ground) with different slopes, all of which were 5-6 metres tall. The slope of the steepest one was nearly 80 degrees. The ground was tiny pebbles/gravel which made small falls somewhat less of an issue. They served no purpose other than being climbed, it was built to explore one's boundaries and to be brave. Most of us were scared to climb them but some who were really good climbers had no problems and got instant street cred by doing that.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#234

Post by unknownkadath »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #202
unknownkadath wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A neural tube isn't a baby.

A human zygote is a person, and so is everything that follows. From the moment of fertilization, there is a single developmental progression of a single organism. There isn't any other meaningful scientific or logical distinction that can be made. Before fertilization, you have the gametes from two separate organisms. Afterwards, there is a new, unique organism (a human being) who has a separate identify. And yes, th…

You are welcome to your wrong opinion, just like Pythagoras.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#235

Post by unknownkadath »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #204
unknownkadath wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? So what?

I think the commenter is just pointing out a potential fallacy -- comparing things that are fundamentally different to force a conclusion that is nonsensical.

Like how you compare a live woman with a history and thoughts and dreams with a few micrograms of cells that a body may or may not spontaneosly eject via well-characterized biological processes?

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#236

Post by unknownkadath »

baud147258 wrote: post #226
justasitsounds wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if we're talking about potential, most pro-lifers make exceptions for cases of rape or incest. However, if it's one's "sincerely held belief" that a ball of cells is a human because it has the potential to become a conscious human being then such exceptions are the equivalent to killing an adult who's only crime is to have been conceived as a result of rape or incest. Personally I am pro-choice, but if you are…

I'm pro-life and wouldn't make any exception in case of rape and incest; there's already been a crime, no need to add another (innocent) victim to the tally. But I think that we would need to also put into place to help women with unwanted pregnancies too.

Pythagoras thought beans were people.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#237

Post by unknownkadath »

burfog wrote: post #217
unknownkadath wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A neural tube isn't a baby.

Say what??? A neural tube doesn't instantly transform into a baby at the moment of birth. The unborn that are getting killed can typically move about, feel pain, and respond to injury. They react in agony when being torn apart or injected with brine. They have brainwaves, which is the usual standard (varies by state law) we use to draw the line at the end of life, with the loss of brainwaves meaning death. Obviously…

All those same things apply to house flies. Look, you believe what you believe because a priest or a guy wearing khakis and a sports jacket named "Pastor Skip" told you so. Don't pretend that your opinion came from anywhere else, or that all of the tortured logic in your post is anything other than a post facto justifiction of that religious opinion.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#238

Post by geggam »

wongarsu wrote: post #232
geggam wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your idea works until you look at something like the autobahn. Having driven on it I can say what I feel the main factor to safety is driver behavior. I see more turn signals used and when someone is going faster the other folks tend to move out of their way. Its more of a social mindset that creates safe roads than anything IMO.

Driver behaviour on the Autobahn is not some accident. Germany has the most expensive drivers licence in the world due to the number of lessions you have to take to even be allowed to take the exams, with most people opting in to even more lessons to pass the exams. To pass the practical exam you have to drive pretty much perfectly (a small number of people never pass). So everybody knows how to drive correctly and h…

So you are saying people are trained to be personally responsible?

I agree with that. The US has been training people to blame others for several decades now. The difference is obvious

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#239

Post by fatnoah »

twic wrote: post #47
fatnoah wrote: post #3

The only anecdote I can share about this comes from the time my family was touring a local day camp. On the tour, they showed us everything: archery, fishing, swimming, ropes, and everything else you could think of. At one point, we came to a massive, 10 foot high pile of dirt. The kids immediately ran for the dirt pile and the parents' reactions were a 50/50 mix of "Awesome" or "What are you building here?" I knew t…

Me and a mate used to go out into the local woods, find little streams, and dam them.

Very nice. I was also into amateur civil engineering as a kid.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#240

Post by asciirobot »

tr33house wrote: post #66

I loved this from one of the article's comments by Deb: "The coup de grace, though, came the day I went to pick a student up from the playground and as the child was running to greet me, the preschool teacher sang out ‘Remember the new rule, Kai! No running on the playground!’ No. Running. On. The. Playground."

This is a real thing. Playground monitors are often little Hitlers. My old co-worker and his wife have been dealing with this with their son. Playground monitor woman makes them line up against the wall, has outlawed running, no shouting or loud sounds, the list goes on. By all accounts, she's an extremely bitter unpleasant human being and all round miserable wretch so she just takes it out on the kids, robbing them of what little free play time they have.

Luckily my ex co-worker's wife is a bit of a trouble maker and has taught her son to organize. He successfully organized a bunch of kids to protest the unfair rules and draft their own set of rules they thought was reasonable. Last I heard, they succeeded. Unfortunately that worked with a Napoleon complex is still around but she's been somewhat neutralized.

Post reply on HN