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

‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

longreads.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 474 posts

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#151

Post by phillc73 »

antipotoad wrote: post #134
phillc73 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last Saturday afternoon I was driving home in heavy fog. Suddenly coming towards me was a BMW SUV at least 75% in my lane. I managed to brake heavily and drift towards the outside verge. We didn’t hit. It’s about the closest I’ve come to a head on collision. With my whole family in the car, there was utter silence for the next several minutes. Pretty sure I nearly died three days ago.

From one survivor of a near-certain-death scenario to another: glad that you’re still here with us to tell your story. No two experiences are alike, but don’t be surprised if it takes you a long while to process what happened. Good that you’re able to talk about it here; if you can, I encourage you to talk to your family about it, even if only to let them know you acknowledge it happened. (Then again, feel free to ig…

Comment appreciated. My wife, in the front seat next to me, and I were certainly in shock. We pulled over and had a 15 minutes rest while the adrenaline wore off. We breathed deeply and talked about what had just happened.

I used to commute in London for many years on a motorcyle and also raced them for a few years. I've had my share of near misses and ended up in hospital once. That was all somehow different - it was only me in danger usually and at least when racing I was always hyper aware that things can go bad fast.

This was a totally different experience. Completely innocuous one might think, on a road regularly traveled, at legal speeds. I think having my family with me made a big difference to my reaction. It wasn't just me in danger any more.

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#152

Post by rootusrootus »

13of40 wrote: post #104
bitexploder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple of thoughts: Probably just leaking voltage, so not a full circuit shock, that is my first guess. Also, even wet your skin has high-ish resistance. It also may have traveled on the outside of your body to ground, path of least resistance? I have been bit by 120 and 240. When it is a full load it hekkin hurts.

Does it matter whether the light was switched on? It seems like the path of least resistance in that scenario would be the other copper wire leading out of the light socket rather than the high resistance person connecting to ground. I've had a similar experience, where (at the age of about 10) I touched an exposed 120v AC wire on a running water pump, while standing in a muddy field, and I only got a mild vibrating…

> Does it matter whether the light was switched on?

Depends on how it is wired. Sometimes lights are wired so that the switch comes before the fixture, sometimes after. One of several reasons you should always turn power off at the breaker when fiddling with the wiring, instead of assuming it won't be hot if the switch is off.

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#153

Post by poulpy123 »

itsmemattchung wrote: post #26

Some tips on where to begin to learn more about nature and survive in the wild? Maybe an REI class? I'm a little embarrassed to admit that should I ever venture out into the wilderness, I would definitely not survive. I lack basic survival skills and nature would eat me alive. That being said, I always admired folks who could go camping for days (or weeks), who could cook up a warm (and edible) meal over a campfire.

There are millions of people practicing outdoor activities without problems, you would do fine if you don't do something stupid for getting views on youtube or tiktok.

(and cooking a meal on a camping stove is just cooking, nothing magical)

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#154

Post by poulpy123 »

the_af wrote: post #49
user3939382 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first thing to learn is to have respect for the harsh reality of the environment. You’d be surprised how many people get killed because they don’t (looking at you Christopher McCandless). So your awareness itself is already a good start.

I don't understand why McCandless was idolized (I do know there was backlash from actual knowledgeable people, like park rangers). He purposefully put himself in harm's way and didn't have any relevant skills that would have helped him survive. So what's admirable or romantic about the way he died?

You mistake idolization and fascination. People (myself included) are fascinated by his calling to quit society and to act on it, but I never saw someone idolizing him

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#155

Post by antipotoad »

bombcar wrote: post #42
itsmemattchung wrote: post #26

Some tips on where to begin to learn more about nature and survive in the wild? Maybe an REI class? I'm a little embarrassed to admit that should I ever venture out into the wilderness, I would definitely not survive. I lack basic survival skills and nature would eat me alive. That being said, I always admired folks who could go camping for days (or weeks), who could cook up a warm (and edible) meal over a campfire.

Honestly the three things you can do easily: 1. Only go deep into nature (out of cell range) with someone experienced. 2. Obtain a rescue device (Apple satellite cell, Garmin GPS emergency beacon, etc). 3. If stranded in a vehicle stay with the vehicle!

If you’re in the Swiss Alps, have the REGA app installed and active, pay the incredibly reasonable membership fee, but for goodness sake do not treat it like your personal helicopter rescue service.

It’s a classic case of moral hazard [1].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#156

Post by Xeoncross »

Every year I watch as more entitled people cause the state and national parks to restrict access.

Someone doing something dumb, going where they shouldn't, taking something, saying something, posting something.

The majority loose out because of the selfishness of the few.

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#157

Post by rootusrootus »

nerdponx wrote: post #135
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It only takes 80ma across your heart to stop it In a lab, sure. In reality you need a lot of amps going into the body to get enough amps across the heart to screw with it. Defibrillators wouldn't be chock full of capacitors if that wasn't the case. Constantly repeating these sorts of misleading DARE-esque talking points is why nobody takes what the safety preachers have to say seriously. People find out through life…

Wait, what? This is like advocating for playing Russian roulette because it's not guaranteed to kill you.

There's a pretty big difference in the odds of a house mains electrical shock stopping your heart compared to the 1 in 6 chance of the bullet being in the chamber that lands in alignment with the barrel.

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#158

Post by Tao3300 »

newaccount74 wrote: post #68
emtel wrote: post #48

One time, I was driving at night in the Sierra after a storm - roads were covered in snow. It's a drive I've made close to 100 times without incident. Going around a bend, I saw a car in the ditch on the outside of the curve. I stopped the car, put on the hazards, and went to see if there was anyone in the car. As I was about to cross the highway a car come sliding around the bend more or less sideways. I stopped and…

I've accidentally touched live electricity (230V) several times, and from speaking to other people it's not a rare occurrence. I think you actually need to be pretty unlucky to die from an electric shock at home.

> I think you actually need to be pretty unlucky to die from an electric shock at home.

Though if there's one thing we've learned from the article, there will be plenty of people waiting in the wings of the Intenet to sputter "Karma!" and "Darwin!" when you do.

Aside, if you ever feel like saying that sort of thing, take an idea, principal, or religious icon that has a deep meaning to you, or in the latter case, someone whose work you think was influential and great. Fix that image in your mind, think "serves you right, asshole", and scream the word or the name out at the top of your lungs. Then reflect on how fucking stupid that was.

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#159

Post by taeric »

kibwen wrote: post #86
emtel wrote: post #48

One time, I was driving at night in the Sierra after a storm - roads were covered in snow. It's a drive I've made close to 100 times without incident. Going around a bend, I saw a car in the ditch on the outside of the curve. I stopped the car, put on the hazards, and went to see if there was anyone in the car. As I was about to cross the highway a car come sliding around the bend more or less sideways. I stopped and…

> Going around a bend, I saw a car in the ditch on the outside of the curve. I stopped the car, put on the hazards, and went to see if there was anyone in the car. As I was about to cross the highway a car come sliding around the bend more or less sideways. The lesson here is this: lightning strikes twice (frustratingly, the usual idiom is as wrong as can be). In other words, if you observe an outcome and have no oth…

Is it that lightning strikes twice, or that most events are not as rare and in need of as much setup as a lightning strike?

Re: ‘That girl is going to get herself killed’ (2022)

#160

Post by gameman144 »

nerdponx wrote: post #135
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It only takes 80ma across your heart to stop it In a lab, sure. In reality you need a lot of amps going into the body to get enough amps across the heart to screw with it. Defibrillators wouldn't be chock full of capacitors if that wasn't the case. Constantly repeating these sorts of misleading DARE-esque talking points is why nobody takes what the safety preachers have to say seriously. People find out through life…

Wait, what? This is like advocating for playing Russian roulette because it's not guaranteed to kill you.

I read it more like saying that we should teach "Russian roulette has a 1/6 chance to kill you, which increases every round", rather than "Russian roulette will definitely kill you."

The former puts the information into the hands of individuals, and let's them draw the appropriate conclusions. With the latter, you risk someone saying "I played Russian roulette and it was fine, this whole safety thing is BS”

This risk is even bigger if millions of people have tried and survived the purportedly deadly activity, such as home wiring shocks.

Post reply on HN