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

Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 142 posts

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#131

Post by s1artibartfast »

fitblipper wrote: post #110

When Tucson experienced a hazardous chemical spill during evening rush hour[0] officials required everyone to shelter in their homes to avoid the poisonous fumes outside. At the same time they closed tons of roads for miles around the area, even the inbound road access to many residential areas. What could people do who needed to get home to their kids? They had to park their car and trek a few miles to their homes.…

Or when Uvalde police ordered parents to stand back while their children were slaughtered.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#132

Post by conductr »

tegmark wrote: post #37

we dont live in a world where public servant are sage old men who are wise and knowledgeable, who have decades of experience in their domain and spend the majority of their time and effort working for the people. we live in a world where government employees are most likely a business or humanity major, are only knowledgeable or dedicated to their domain in a superficial way, and these people have dumb brains that ar…

It’s my thought with the Uvalde situation. Ultimately, those cops didn’t want to die a heroes death; even with some kids being harmed as they watched. I couldn’t imagine obeying the order to stand down while being equipped with a firearm.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#133

Post by s1artibartfast »

cmh89 wrote: post #127
s1artibartfast wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that it's context-specific. Only you have the personal context. I know several people that have ignored fire evacuation orders and saved their homes instead. No fire department is going to tell people to fight the fire because they don't know people's individual situations. Shelter and place orders are another funny one. I have a lot of fond memories ignoring shelter in place orders hiking and camping in…

>I know several people that have ignored fire evacuation orders and saved their homes instead. Lots of wildfire stories include people who ignored evacuation orders and died. This is just silly confirmation bias. The large majority of people who survive wildfires do so because they listened to government officials and implying that people should ignore evacuation orders is frankly stupidly dangerous. >Shelter and pla…

To quote PHPisthebest "I think you have confused ignoring the government orders with "doing the opposite".

Are you claiming that government orders are optimal 100% of the time in 100% of situations? If not, then sometimes it is wrong, and it might be wrong for you.

>How would going out lower your risk in this case? You obviously increased your risk, if only so slightly.

Being alone miles from anyone else has zero covid risk. Covid risk doesn't kick in when you leave the door of your house. In my case, I also had roommates who worked, like me and interacted with other people.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#134

Post by creer »

phpisthebest wrote: post #117
creer wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to? I mean there isn't much alternative to central planning. But that doesn't prevent local planning and individuals doing the best for themselves.

Why does there need to be an alternative, and yes central planning often does prevent both local planning and individuals " doing the best for themselves. " for example in the context of Covid response there were many FEDERAL policies put in place that preventing local authorities from overriding them, and prevented "individuals doing the best for themselves. " Some of these were over turned by the courts after month…

Abuses and corruption is how government is done in the US. Sure. That's a problem. As much at the federal as local levels. People can't help themselves. But would the ideal really be to remove all federal action?

In the case of Covid, as much as the top policies were messed up in places, individuals around me very much paid attention and did what they could in addition or in place of that. They still run their own testing standards for example and take anything from CDC with a grain of salt (that will take a LONG time to fix - probably for the better). For one, the massive amounts of money poured into vaccines and lab tests and home tests, IMO, made a difference that would have been much harder to achieve for locals or purely commercial efforts.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#135

Post by rasz »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #124
fitblipper wrote: post #110

When Tucson experienced a hazardous chemical spill during evening rush hour[0] officials required everyone to shelter in their homes to avoid the poisonous fumes outside. At the same time they closed tons of roads for miles around the area, even the inbound road access to many residential areas. What could people do who needed to get home to their kids? They had to park their car and trek a few miles to their homes.…

911: The twin towers also had PA system alerting office workers to stay on their floors. Because that was deemed "safe". And this are buildings that would have gone thru regular fire drills, etc. Those that listened & were above the ~80th floor, did not survive

Even more tragic - Korean disaster mv Sewol where Captain used ship PA to tell school children to stay put, then jumped into safety raft and swam away.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-sinking-of-the-...

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#136

Post by [deleted] »

phpisthebest wrote: post #119
Karellen wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Shelter and place orders are another funny one. I have a lot of fond memories ignoring shelter in place orders hiking and camping in the wilderness during covid. I was thinking more about sheltering from tornados and hurricanes.

I think you have confused ignoring the government orders with "doing the opposite of what the government says" For example at different times I have went to my basement during while the tornado sirens where going off, and other times I have stood outside looking at the clouds... Why because I took the governments recommendation, added my own information from various weather sources, radar, and decades of experience a…

[deleted]

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#137

Post by phpisthebest »

creer wrote: post #134
phpisthebest wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does there need to be an alternative, and yes central planning often does prevent both local planning and individuals " doing the best for themselves. " for example in the context of Covid response there were many FEDERAL policies put in place that preventing local authorities from overriding them, and prevented "individuals doing the best for themselves. " Some of these were over turned by the courts after month…

Abuses and corruption is how government is done in the US. Sure. That's a problem. As much at the federal as local levels. People can't help themselves. But would the ideal really be to remove all federal action? In the case of Covid, as much as the top policies were messed up in places, individuals around me very much paid attention and did what they could in addition or in place of that. They still run their own te…

There are multiple issues here that seems to stem from taking my comments in a way not intended.

For example, I am fine with the CDC Existing, I am fine with them advocating the public do x, or y, I am fine with them establishing protocols and guidance for people

I am not fine with them having the authority to order people to do X, or to exceed their authority prohibiting evictions, or working with private industry to target people for censorship that dared to question their advice or many of the other things

Again read my opening comment "Government works best which is subservient to the people" this means the government can ADVISE people on the best actions to take, but should not ORDER people to do it...

The second the government has the power to ORDER you do something well you are now a serf and not a free person.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#138

Post by yellow_lead »

brianwawok wrote: post #71
yellow_lead wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially in emergencies - information is potentially bad, and going with the crowd can leave you dead. That said, preparation is key.

I think this is a tragedy of the commons type case. In general and for the society at large, what you want is order. Listen to authorities, do what they say. If everyone is in full panic mode, its very likely even more people die. By following directions and maintaining order, you increase the odds that more people survive. For you personally? Go in full panic mode, do whatever you have to, to live. At the end of the…

Some types of situations certainly may be like this, not sure why others disagree.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#139

Post by cmh89 »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #133
cmh89 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I know several people that have ignored fire evacuation orders and saved their homes instead. Lots of wildfire stories include people who ignored evacuation orders and died. This is just silly confirmation bias. The large majority of people who survive wildfires do so because they listened to government officials and implying that people should ignore evacuation orders is frankly stupidly dangerous. >Shelter and pla…

To quote PHPisthebest "I think you have confused ignoring the government orders with "doing the opposite". Are you claiming that government orders are optimal 100% of the time in 100% of situations? If not, then sometimes it is wrong, and it might be wrong for you. >How would going out lower your risk in this case? You obviously increased your risk, if only so slightly. Being alone miles from anyone else has zero cov…

>Are you claiming that government orders are optimal 100% of the time in 100% of situations? If not, then sometimes it is wrong, and it might be wrong for you.

Of course not. Your example was just not a situation where not following orders was individually optimal. You and your friends are suffering from confirmation bias. They did something incredibly stupid and dangerous and put their lives at risk and more importantly, increased risk for the firefighters working the job. It happened to work out but that doesn't mean it was wise. They could have just as easily died or killed a firefighter who was trying to rescue them.

Why don't you reach out to a wildland firefighters outfit and see their perspective on what bullshit they have to deal with when dumbasses don't evacuate.

For the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time, following emergency instructions is the optimal outcome. Even in this case, the folks who went around the barrier didn't know that going around was safer than going back. They gambled and it worked out.

>Being alone miles from anyone else has zero covid risk. Covid risk doesn't kick in when you leave the door of your house. In my case, I also had roommates who worked, like me and interacted with other people.

Ah yes, I'm sure you magically went from your bedroom to wilderness miles away from anyone else without stopping or interacting with anyone!

Look, I'm not saying going out in the wilderness was wrong, its just silly to think it lowered your risk at all.

Re: Maui residents who disobeyed barricades survived fires

#140

Post by s1artibartfast »

cmh89 wrote: post #139
s1artibartfast wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote PHPisthebest "I think you have confused ignoring the government orders with "doing the opposite". Are you claiming that government orders are optimal 100% of the time in 100% of situations? If not, then sometimes it is wrong, and it might be wrong for you. >How would going out lower your risk in this case? You obviously increased your risk, if only so slightly. Being alone miles from anyone else has zero cov…

>Are you claiming that government orders are optimal 100% of the time in 100% of situations? If not, then sometimes it is wrong, and it might be wrong for you. Of course not. Your example was just not a situation where not following orders was individually optimal. You and your friends are suffering from confirmation bias. They did something incredibly stupid and dangerous and put their lives at risk and more importa…

I think that you are approaching this is making the mistake of treating each instance as identical when they are not. Different situations have different risks and you can't claim that a choice was wrong or stupid without understanding the specific situation. This is the difference between the usefulness of a heuristic in general, and the usefulness of a heuristic in a specific situation.

You can't claim that they put their lives at risk and made a stupid mistake without that information.

The same holds true for the covid example. You don't know the specifics and are making a generalization. It is in fact possible to go camping without interacting with people.

Post reply on HN