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

Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 72 posts

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#41

Post by test1235 »

soVeryTired wrote: post #20
navigatesol wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I came away sympathetic — recognizing a kindred spirit who’s capable of a lot, but had a hard time fitting in with the world If there's one thing I've learned about HackerNews, it's that everyone here is an exceptional but misunderstood genius. > while everyone else just saw a very impressive asshole. I don't know a single person who came away from this film with the impression that Alex Honnold is an asshole. Seem…

Well he didn't treat his girlfriend particularly well through the film. He was never actively nasty to her, but he was dismissive and didn't appear too interested in her either.

Alex is the way he's always been, and she got into the relationship knowing that. I think it's quite selfish of her to expect him to change for her.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#42

Post by mnm1 »

gameswithgo wrote: post #25
balfirevic wrote: post #16

It's interesting to see some negative reactions to what Alex did. His actions bring to forefront a belief which doesn't seem to sit well with many: his life is his own. And our lives really are, ultimately, our own. Well, at least until we bring kids into the world. We can certainly choose to give up part of this autonomy, but we shouldn't demand it from anyone else.

I've been fascinated for a long time by how people get angry at others for taking risks. Ride my mountain bike slowly on a side walk without a helmet? It invokes ANGER in others. Why? Is it an evolutionary trait built into pack animals perhaps? That would make sense. But still, leave me alone! =) Also, yes internet I understand that falling from a mountain bike at a slow speed can impact your head just as hard as fal…

Riding your bike that way in Amsterdam (or really any place in Europe and I imagine most of the rest of the world) wouldn't turn one head, let alone invoke anger. That's definitely an American thing. I guess some people get off on the righteousness and they attempt to control other people in the most minuscule of ways. I think this is because they have little freedom and control over their own lives and feel helpless themselves. This part is not limited to America, but in America it's a big part of the culture. Someone else having fun while you're not? Be angry and try to stop them, often using laws. Someone else doing things you don't like? Same thing. Control coupled with a puritan mindset leads to these bizarre reactions.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#43

Post by whatshisface »

balfirevic wrote: post #36
whatshisface wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are plenty of people who are trying to get their loved ones to quit smoking.

But do they think of them as assholes because they are smoking? Or eating unhealthy food?

If you eat so badly that you die at 40, then yes that's just as bad as slipping off a rock. Look at it this way, let's say a guy gets married and then starts eating so many big macs every day that he's headed to the grave in a few years. My guess would be that his wife would hate him for that even more than if he was a solo climber.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#44

Post by SolaceQuantum »

gameswithgo wrote: post #33
aikinai wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in the real world the consequences of your actions aren’t confined to yourself. Reckless behavior increases the impact on anyone involved in an accident with you, mentally impacts anyone that might see your brains splatter, increases insurance premiums, uses hospital resources, etc.

None of that is what actually causes people to be angry. Eating junk food, drinking a beer, driving a sports car, doesn't evoke the same emotional reaction in people, which has the same sorts of consequences if you did some sort of long term impact analysis, which normal people don't do on the spot. As well, insurance and hospital costs are likely reduced since I'm more often just dead rather than maimed. Plus I'll h…

"None of that is what actually causes people to be angry. Eating junk food, drinking a beer, driving a sports car, doesn't evoke the same emotional reaction in people"

I'm sorry, I can't agree with this. There's plenty of anger and disdain for all those things. There's plenty of "fuck fatties", "fuck rich fat cats", and "fuck drunks" sentiment, and I don't go out of my way to engage in communities I know to be hateful or particularly negative. (Unless HN counts??)

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#45

Post by joelbluminator »

cletus wrote: post #40

I can't remember how or exactly when I came across Alex but it was several years ago. On the one hand I find parts of him highly relatable (eg "learning his lines" and his aversion to asking others to climb with him) and others not (eg I have zero inclination to climb anything). I certainly respect how much work and preparation he puts into his climbs. The question is: how is he different to the Everest glory hounds…

He's different than them in that he's the best in the world in what he does, and also he doesn't put anyone else in danger (Everest climbers put the Sherpas who work for them in danger. They also provide them a great living). But in essence both Honnold and said climbers are just living their dreams; for some it's climbing El Capitan solo and for others it's climbing Everest with 20 Sherpas that help you get there. They're all looking for fame from others, Honnold doesn't shy away from media to say the least. I don't think it's all that different to be honest. Honnold isn't helping to make the world a better place by climbing rocks, I see no reason to treat him as a saint (nor as a villain) based on his sports activities.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#46

Post by have_faith »

soVeryTired wrote: post #20
navigatesol wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I came away sympathetic — recognizing a kindred spirit who’s capable of a lot, but had a hard time fitting in with the world If there's one thing I've learned about HackerNews, it's that everyone here is an exceptional but misunderstood genius. > while everyone else just saw a very impressive asshole. I don't know a single person who came away from this film with the impression that Alex Honnold is an asshole. Seem…

Well he didn't treat his girlfriend particularly well through the film. He was never actively nasty to her, but he was dismissive and didn't appear too interested in her either.

That's odd, in my group the main take away was how toxic she is to their relationship. It came across as if she attached herself to him in a way that came across as very manipulative. Demonstrated well in the house buying scene I think.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#47

Post by drewmol »

cletus wrote: post #40

I can't remember how or exactly when I came across Alex but it was several years ago. On the one hand I find parts of him highly relatable (eg "learning his lines" and his aversion to asking others to climb with him) and others not (eg I have zero inclination to climb anything). I certainly respect how much work and preparation he puts into his climbs. The question is: how is he different to the Everest glory hounds…

I think having children probably helps people realize that parents also need their children more than their children need to be the 6000th person to climb everest.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#48

Post by reascenda »

snarf21 wrote: post #19
reascenda wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought he was an asshole. Quite apart from how he came across in the film exposing yourself to utterly needless danger is a very bad way to treat people who love you.

I get that perspective. Let me ask this: Do you feel the same way about the people in your life who smoke? or eat fast food? or don't exercise daily? or text while driving? I know you can say those are an accumulation of small dangers but it isn't like Honnold never climbed once and decided to free solo the hardest cliff in the world. Do you feel the same about race car drivers? NFL players? We all have our identity…

For some of those things yes. Dangerous driving and smoking for me are reckless to the point of being blameworthy. I'm less sure about eating badly and not exercising but I'm not sure that's a difference of kind rather than degree (inasmuch as those things tend to be less harmful, or an instance is less harmful)

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#49

Post by meheleventyone »

cletus wrote: post #40

I can't remember how or exactly when I came across Alex but it was several years ago. On the one hand I find parts of him highly relatable (eg "learning his lines" and his aversion to asking others to climb with him) and others not (eg I have zero inclination to climb anything). I certainly respect how much work and preparation he puts into his climbs. The question is: how is he different to the Everest glory hounds…

There’s also the technical difficulty. Summiting Everest is within reach of a lot more people than even climbing the routes Alex does with ropes and protection. What’s objectionable about Everest isn’t so much the risks as the commercialism involved.

Free soloing relatively easy routes is also fairly common. Both for the challenge and in the case of easier routes as shortcuts to avoid a long walk around.

I think a lot of the anger boils down to limited experience driving peoples risk perception coupled to their own risk tolerance.

Re: Alex Honnold's next summit: the rest of his life

#50

Post by everdev »

gameswithgo wrote: post #33
aikinai wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in the real world the consequences of your actions aren’t confined to yourself. Reckless behavior increases the impact on anyone involved in an accident with you, mentally impacts anyone that might see your brains splatter, increases insurance premiums, uses hospital resources, etc.

None of that is what actually causes people to be angry. Eating junk food, drinking a beer, driving a sports car, doesn't evoke the same emotional reaction in people, which has the same sorts of consequences if you did some sort of long term impact analysis, which normal people don't do on the spot. As well, insurance and hospital costs are likely reduced since I'm more often just dead rather than maimed. Plus I'll h…

A few ideas on why people get angry:

1. Public health campaigns - They don't get outraged by junk food, sports cars, etc. because there isn't advertising telling them it's unequivocally bad. Government will tell you that not wearing a helmet, smoking a cigarette, etc. is universally bad so it's easier for people to see someone "doing a bad thing". People get angry when other people "break the rules".

2. They know someone who was affected. I'm guessing if your cousin got hurt because they weren't wearing a helmet, you might carry some emotions that could be released when you see someone else taking the same risk.

3. Human nature. Back in tribes, if our Uncle was trying to scale giant cliff faces for fun, we'd be at greater risk of less food / losing a war if the tribe let him risk his life for little to no tribal gain. Especially if the young kids thought it was cool and wanted to try it too. People are persuadable and can be influenced. It's not unreasonable to think that glorifying death defying sports or financially rewarding them will result in more people risking their lives.

4. Bullying. If you see someone doing something different or not fitting in, some humans feel compelled to yell at that person to increase conformity and cohesion.

5. Low self confidence. They might be highly critical of themselves and see an opportunity to criticize others.

For me, #3 is the most common answer. People in strong, healthy communities feel safer so they probably don't want what they consider a "risky" behavior to spread.

Post reply on HN