L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter • Hacker News Board

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#11

Post by headShrinker » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:25 PM UTC

While it's up to scientist to use the best science available. No where to they say scientists are responsible for outcomes. If the failure is based on the best science then what is needed is better science.

Ultimately, the failure is on the journalists and news organizations who choose to broadcast the words of the scientists. They have their rapport with the public and have responsibility to uphold their journalistic integrity. What is really at fault here is editorial review of the news organizations. Period. Anyone can say anything, but it is the news corporations that broadcast the message.

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#12

Post by engtech » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:29 PM UTC

mturmon wrote: post #8

jpwagner wrote: post #2

This is unbelievable. Is there anywhere to find all of the facts? This article doesn't give background info. It took some digging to find that indeed the scientists had given a reassuring statement, though it had an expected but-we-cant-be-sure admonition, beforehand.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

Does anyone understand the title of Nature article?

"Italy puts seismology in the dock" ?

is it meant to be "in the dark" ?

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#13

Post by robertelder » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 PM UTC

kitsune_ wrote: post #4

I can wholeheartedly recommend a documentary called Draquila – L'Italia che trema [1] about the L'Aquila earthquake. As many of my Italian friends tell me, Italy is an absolutely corrupt shit hole. I remember a scene where they showed recordings of civil protection officials gloating about the disaster on the phone, right after it happened. They talked about the opportunity to make money [2]. The head of the national…

Should be

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draquila_%E2%80%93_L%27Italia_c...

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#14

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 PM UTC

mturmon wrote: post #8

jpwagner wrote: post #2

This is unbelievable. Is there anywhere to find all of the facts? This article doesn't give background info. It took some digging to find that indeed the scientists had given a reassuring statement, though it had an expected but-we-cant-be-sure admonition, beforehand.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

[deleted]

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#15

Post by wisty » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 PM UTC

Predicting an earthquake is predicting when a bent wooden ruler will snap. Sometimes it creaks before it snaps. Sometimes it creaks, and doesn't snap. Sometimes it just snaps.

The way to prevent deaths from earthquakes is to ensure buildings can survive them. Modern buildings collapsed in the quake. I wonder if they were built to standard, or if a few corners were cut?

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#16

Post by arscan » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #12

mturmon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?

It means to put on trial.

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#17

Post by mikeash » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #12

mturmon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?

"In the dock" means "on trial". http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/in+the+dock.htm...

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#18

Post by kirian » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:32 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #12

mturmon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?

"in the dock" is an idiom meaning to be put on trial.

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#19

Post by michaelhoffman » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:32 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #12

mturmon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting presid…

Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?

  Definition of DOCK
  : the place in a criminal court where a prisoner stands or sits during trial
  — in the dock
  : on trial

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dock

Commonly used in British/Commonwealth English, and Nature is based in London. I don't think I've ever heard it used in American English.

Re: L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists found guilty of manslaughter

#20

Post by jivatmanx » Mon, Oct 22, 2012, 4:32 PM UTC

kitsune_ wrote: post #4

I can wholeheartedly recommend a documentary called Draquila – L'Italia che trema [1] about the L'Aquila earthquake. As many of my Italian friends tell me, Italy is an absolutely corrupt shit hole. I remember a scene where they showed recordings of civil protection officials gloating about the disaster on the phone, right after it happened. They talked about the opportunity to make money [2]. The head of the national…

Not all of Italy, only the South. That's why the biggest party in the north is a secessionist party. A lot of cool stuff comes out of the North, like Arduino.