161–170 of 474 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the current is going across your skin, not through it, and stone isn't necessarily a good ground. A light fixture generally won't create enough current to kill you. Usually. Probably not worth testing excessively though.
Aren't light fixtures typically direct mains power?
My speculation: most of the power went through the light and only a part of it shocked the OP.
First I thought that I'm lucky, because I'm not a big outdoor kind of guy. Then I remembered that I've had like 4 close calls while motorbiking, so to each their own risk I guess. (Let's not forget how many people die per year just by falling from a step-ladder etc.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the current is going across your skin, not through it, and stone isn't necessarily a good ground. A light fixture generally won't create enough current to kill you. Usually. Probably not worth testing excessively though.
Aren't light fixtures typically direct mains power?
With as resistive as skin is to electricity, 110 isn't usually enough to overcome it and push power through the heart.
Keyword: usually
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't light fixtures typically direct mains power?
Yes but we can only speculate what happened. My speculation: most of the power went through the light and only a part of it shocked the OP.
Risk can be fun. I don't feel bad if someone gets hurt or killed doing an activity that is inherently dangerous. They died doing what they enjoyed and feeling alive. Don't feel bad for me if I go that way either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Humans are notoriously bad at evaluating probabilities and expected outcomes in probabilistic scenarios, especially in when one possible outcome is catastrophic with low probability. Otherwise you wouldn't see so many reckless distracted drivers on the road.
You are advocating for a public communication strategy that only makes sense in some kind of rationalist fantasy world, but not in the real world.
It's not some conspiracy to infantilize the public, it's just good sense to not do dangerous stuff and tempt fate.
Risk can be fun. I don't feel bad if someone gets hurt or killed doing an activity that is inherently dangerous. They died doing what they enjoyed and feeling alive. Don't feel bad for me if I go that way either.
Yes, risk can be fun. But everyone I encountered in risk sports knew the difference between "smart crazy" vs "dumb crazy". It is the difference between using knowledge, skill, technology, and mental focus to reduce risk to manageable levels, vs "getting away with it". Getting away with it, riding on PDL — Pure Dumb Luck — can work for a long time. Until it doesn't, and you're dead. Like those YouTube idiots in the ar…