Live data from Hacker News

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

longreads.com

451–460 of 474 posts

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

#451
post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I remember reading a long-form story about the 'Death Valley Germans' from this site, and it was so sad - a family with young kids, that just hadn't comprehended how far they could be from help when they got into trouble in the USA. That heading towards the local military base might not help when everything is so huge that all you'll see is miles of fence.

It's a good read. Can be found here [0]. [0]: https://www.otherhand.org/home-page/search-and-rescue/the-hu...

That was wild.

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

#452

I know someone who spent her twenties as an ocean lifeguard, including the real Baywatch, LA County Fire Department lifeguards. That's competitive to get in, and she's one of the few women to qualify. 6 feet tall, blonde, and muscular. Country girl who grew up on ten acres in Northern California. She spent years rescuing people who did stupid stuff. During the off-season for the beach she did off-road vehicle rescues…

I mean... coding in my basement, playing games and smoking pot has never got me worried about getting killed... and that makes me a pro-drug, non-competitive, non-muscular short male

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

#453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read a lot of assertions that this is true, but I'm looking for reports of this actually occurring. Either case studies from medical journals, or even newspaper articles.

Maybe start here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2658458/

Thank you.

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

#454
post #291
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…

> If anyone would like to explain why that didn't kill me I'm all ears. What kills people is current, not voltage. With AC having your heart beat 50 times a second can also cause you to die hours or even days after receiving a shock, but even that requires enough current to flow and cross your skin resistance. Go to ghe hospital even if you are alive and feel well after an electrical shock! Your heart may have suffer…

It's AC and the cycle (Hz) is x, then the voltage hits +/- max at 2x and also crosses 0 at 2x. Current in the system also crosses 0 at 2x although the phase angle is likely to differ from the applied voltage.

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

#455

I would like to say that I'm generally a pretty experienced outdoorsman. I camp, hike, backpack, snowshoe, boulder,sport climb, used to snowboard extensively and do whitewater rafting. I've summitted Mt. Washington, NH in late October, done plenty of hikes from Death Valley and the Mojave to Sequoia NP, to the bright angel trail, etc. Enough to say I've got some experience, and done my fair share of risky stuff. Most…

>Sadly, these are mostly types of common sense. The lack thereof is the real issue, not ones experience level. I've spent a lot of time teaching rock climbing, and just about every aspect thereof. Something I saw again and again is that what I understood to be "common sense" was simply that which I had forgotten learning. Autobelay accidents are a really good illustration of this: the most important safety check is t…

I catch your drift on the common sense is just forgotten learning. That's probably closer to the truth than we'd all like to be told. Thing is, I don't think you've contradicted me re: too much confidence in your abilities.

It's basically like rolling Nat20s in Dungeons and Dragons. Eventually everyone runs into a situation they need to get out of, A.K.A 'roll to save' (I think that's the correct term). You can reduce to times you need to 'roll a nat 20' by improving your skills, knowledge, and gear. Or you can think of those things as removing sides from the die, making it more likely you can get a positive result. When you're accomplished and capable outdoors, though, whatever puts you on your ass is probably not just a paper cut. A higher ceiling of competence drags the floor of consequences up with it.

Even more so than that though, the best way to stay safe is to not put yourself in situations where you need to "roll a nat 20" to save yourself or avoid something bad happening. I.e "don't let your guard down" is a preventative, and the saying goes 'something something an ounce of it...'

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

#456
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An arms race of sorts is inevitable. Your reactive armour will be worthless in the face of my active measures. Innocent casualties are inevitable, but they're the price we pay for freedom.

> Your reactive armour will be worthless in the face of my active measures. Suddenly [1] isn't so ridiculous anymore... [1]: https://youtu.be/k7YVxLLIuGM?t=149

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ejcih7N_gnY

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

#457
post #436
post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A 2000V .001A power supply might give quite a shock on the other hand, and depending upon any capacitance in the supply might just as well prove fatal. What does the capacitor supply, that the PSU can't? Could it be discharge current ? Before you accuse me of repeating dangerous tropes, please consider making sure to discuss it with the folks at VDE, because this is what it says in their (and the equivalent europea…

I do see where the general objection to the "current kills" comes from, even if their reasoning got a bit muddled. All else equal, twice the voltage yields twice the current (and 4x the power). So while yes, it's the current that kills you, in the majority of circumstances high voltage = high current. Outside of explicitly current-limited setups (e.g. a Van de Graaff generator or a desktop ionizer), most higher volta…

> in the majority of circumstances high voltage = high current

To be debated. Most of the visible (air-arcing) shocks I tend to get happen when I wear the wrong textile and given the length of the arc the voltage is well above 1 kV. So in most of the circumstances I personally encounter the current did not kill me.

What kills you is the current flow through your body. Voltage and frequency helps to produce that flow. RCDs and other protective devices help to limit that flow.

High voltage is dangerous if it has the current to back it. High voltage is also dangerous in the hands of people who don't understand the difference between current and voltage.

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

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fairly standard martial arts strategy when fighting multiple attackers as well. If you're fighting two people and keep one of them between you and the other, then it's just a one-on-one fight.

If you watch martial arts movies you should know that the attackers wait in line and only attack once the previous one has gotten a beating :). They never attack at the same time.

People with good tactical awareness make sure they never face more then one opponent at the same time. They survive to tell the tale. Down the line mediocre movie makers recreate the situation in a contrived way. Rinse repeat. Eventually the whole thing is a simulacrum. You're expecting a classic kung-fu movie battle, and that's what you get.

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

#459
post #228
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

One very easy application of this axiom is whenever you're near water or rain and don't want to get wet. You're at the beach, climbing on rocks and you're not sure if a wave will hit you if you climb on the next rock. Is the rock wet? If so it will, if it's dry, you're fine. You're next to a sprinkler system and it's going around and you don't know if you'll get hit if you stand here, is the floor wet? And so on.

The real axiom is, never trust moving water. Never.

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

#460
post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think other people have sort of answered it, but a more general version might be: If you observe an extremely unlikely event, you should update your Bayesian prior about how likely that event is.

Makes sense. I was stuck with the idea that "seeing a car on the side of the road" is closer to seeing a tree that had been struck. Actually seeing it get struck would be like seeing the car actively crash. Close in thought to each other, but still different things. Granted, I think your point still fully holds. There is a decay function for the likelihood of repeating events. And if you don't have evidence that what…

Repeating and periodic are not the same. Seeing a singed tree or a spun out car tells you nothing about how frequent these events are. They do tell you this place is likely to see those events, at any rate.
Post reply on HN