Live data from Hacker News

Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

slate.com

201–210 of 227 posts

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking in circles, and in your first paragraph literally just repeated back to me what I'd written about your post. In any case, we have already had many people attack theories of government involvement based on a lack of evidence. Yet, many posit theories with less evidence (such as yours). So, I merely asked why such theories should be any more credible. That is why it doesn't work for you to merely repeat…

To be more to the point, your post is noisy nonsense that attacks the mere existence of alternative theories, and those who might posit them. I was trying to politely say that your breed of Reddit-style "shoot-the-messenger" post is not usually well received here, thankfully.

Again, you make no sense. No one attacked the "mere existence" of alternative theories. I challenged you to explain why yours is any more credible than others, something which you apparently cannot do, hence your little tirade about what HN is all about.

And, I plainly I didn't "shoot the mesenger". I specifically questioned your message. In fact, you acknowledged this in your previous reply when you "found it remarkable how thouroughly I have tried to refute your simple statement of an alternative scenario". See that? You acknowledged that I was attacking the statement (i.e. message).

And again with the meta-talk. You have still said nothing in defense of your actual post (calling mine "noisy nonsense" doesn't qualify). Instead, you appear to just be saying things that you hope will get you upvotes.

Contrary to what you have declared HN to be in your quest for karma as its self-appointed keeper, I believe what makes it special is the many bright people here who speak a common language, and who sometimes disagree (even vehemently). But, they are able to construct logic-based, thoughtful arguments, which challenge their adversaries and make them think. I have learned much in this way, as I am sure have others.

Here, however, this is not the case. Sadly.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, we really don't know. But I'm extremely uncomfortable by the fact that foul play is a real possibility. We already know that the federal government is operating largely in secret and without regard to the law (their insistence that are indeed following their own secret set of laws doesn't provide me much solace). We already know that various press organizations have been wiretapped. I feel like I've woken up in…

Foul play is almost always a possibility if you over analyze things and don't have a lot evidence. If someone randomly kills them self by jumping off a bridge and no one sees it happen, there is no suicide note, or any other signs, then there could have been foul play because there is no evidence to prove or disprove it. For all anyone knows the person was pushed off the bridge by a passer by. The whole NSA story is…

Perhaps they didn't want the death to look like an accident but still have plausible deniability. By making it obvious they are warning other journalists.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#203

How does a 2013 model Mercedes Benz with a five star ANCAP safety rating (the highest rating you can get) scoring 35.51 points scored out of 37 (an Australian car safety rating for reference) with more airbags than wheels (8 airbags for those of you playing at home including a curtain airbag that drops in-front of the passenger and driver protecting the head and upper-body from impacting anything) crash into a tree w…

Modern safety features are really good at helping you save a car from crashing if you realize what's happening and react in time.

OTOH, they do absolutely nothing if you are inattentive for a moment at high speed, run off the road, and there is a tree in the way.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#204
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought stealthy black helicopters was the ultimate ridiculous conspiracy theory.. until they crashed one in Pakistan. I knew the NSA could listen in wherever they wanted, but I thought mass surveillance and storage of all communications was outlandish 1984-like paranoia.. until Edward Snowden. Now I don't know what to think.

The helicopter in Pakistan was hardly stealthy. Someone tweeted about it as it was flying overhead.

Twitter should run this ad: "Osama Bin Laden died because he wasn't on Twitter! Sign up today!"

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be more to the point, your post is noisy nonsense that attacks the mere existence of alternative theories, and those who might posit them. I was trying to politely say that your breed of Reddit-style "shoot-the-messenger" post is not usually well received here, thankfully.

Again, you make no sense. No one attacked the "mere existence" of alternative theories. I challenged you to explain why yours is any more credible than others, something which you apparently cannot do, hence your little tirade about what HN is all about. And, I plainly I didn't "shoot the mesenger". I specifically questioned your message. In fact, you acknowledged this in your previous reply when you "found it remark…

Edit your noise to about 1/5th the volume and it might be worth skimming. Your prattle is boring.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#206
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(former firefighter) I would look to local and state police for their reports. Any fatal accident with a possibility of foul play, or obvious foul play (DUI, etc) resulted in us assisting the State Police reconstruction team while they processed the scene, measuring and photographing everything to the millimeter, because once we cleaned it up, there was no going back. That said, I've also seen plenty of crazy vehicle…

Of course they don't, but survival rates for wearing a seatbelt are much higher than survival rates for not wearing a seatbelt. Personally, I want a 5-point harness if I ever end up driving in a risky fashion.

Agreed. I certainly encourage seatbelt use as I saw far more people saved by using them than not.

At one point we got to a streak of 8 or 9 rollovers with no injuries whatsoever. If the occupants were not wearing seat belts I can say for certain that streak would have ended earlier.

On a positive note, the number of automobile fatalities each year has been on a steady decline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in...

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#207
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are making a typical statistical error here. It is unlikely for a car to catch fire in an accident, certainly. But it's wrong to take that and conclude that this fire was therefore likely due to foul play. Foul play is still a much less likely explanation for the facts as currently known.

When would statistics support a suspicion of foul play? The scarcity of some occurrence isn't proof against it.

Figure out a prior probability of foul play, figure out the probability of a car bursting into flames on impact, plug the result into Bayes' theorem, and you get the relative likelihoods.

No, scarcity isn't proof against, but it is evidence. A lot of people are talking nonstop about the rarity of cars bursting into flames as evidence against that interpretation, while ignoring the even greater rarity of journalists being murdered by the US government.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Neither has been proved, therefore either is equally likely" is false I didn't say that. Go back and read my post. In fact, it's the opposite. We have many trying to claim the illegitimacy of asking questions, because there is no direct evidence. The parent went so far as to ridicule those asking questions. So, it is they who are making claims about which is more likely, given a lack of evidence in either direction…

I know you didn't say that. Read my post more carefully. Though actually, you're close to saying it here: "[I]t is they who are making claims about which is more likely, given a lack of evidence in either direction." If you lack evidence in either direction, your estimate of likelihood should be at your priors. If your mental model assigns the same prior probability to assassination as to car accidents, it's likely b…

I re-read your post. You are correct. It is possible to read it in a manner wherein you are not making the claim about my post. Seems a little odd as a response. Perhaps your intent would be clearer if your replies didn't hypothesize quite so much about what the parent might be thinking. I noticed a lot of "ifs" in your most recent post as well, as in "if you believe this or that". Comes off rather straw-mannish. Why not just stick to what the person actually said?

But granted, I stand corrected.

I'm aware of the general mode of privileging the hypothesis, though I've never heard that term. I'm not sure that there's anything new or groundbreaking in that post, however. For instance, criminal law is set up to avoid railroading suspects and it's a pretty easily identifiable fallacy, in general.

In any event, your conclusion that I come close to claiming them equally likely rests on its own fallacy. That is, this statement is so general as to be misleading:

"If your mental model assigns the same prior probability to assassination as to car accidents, it's likely broken"

First, I didn't assign a probability. I said we should be asking questions.

But what makes your argument fallacious is that details matter. It is not just any car accident. It is a fiery, one car, high speed accident, under unexplained circumstances. And, he is not just a random person, but a prominent reporter who brought down a powerful person and was working on a "big" story involving, presumably, other powerful people. Ignoring this information, and simply relying on the percentage of the general population who are in car accidents vs assassinated (i.e. relying on the priors) is misguided to say the least.

And while there is a lack of concrete evidence in either direction at this point, the circumstances and information we do have point to the fact that we should be asking questions, not drawing conclusions on any side. Again, that is what my posts are about. Questions.

OTOH, I'm not sure what you are actually trying to say, short of providing an off-topic and somewhat faulty explanation of how we should estimate likliehoods.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> its faster than a Mustang GT from the 90's What?

I have that car and I can attest to it not being incredibly fast. Unfortunately horsepower != speed.

lol. Source: http://www.zeroto60times.com/

1996 Ford Mustang GT 0-60 mph 6.7 Quarter mile 15.1 1999 Ford Mustang GT 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter mile 13.9 2006 Honda Accord EX (V6) 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.3

Only when they re-designed the GT in the late 90's did it get faster - which isn't really relevant, I was making the general point that modern cars have gotten a ridiculous amount of power, often in a lighter vehicle (e.g. the 2006 honda accord I drive).

> Unfortunately horsepower != speed

Horsepower doesn't give a direct comparison across vehicles, but generally speaking, yes horsepower = speed.

> I have that car and I can attest to it not being incredibly fast.

Perhaps you dont have the v6 manual? Any car that gets to 60mph in under 6 seconds is fast. And again - my comparison with the mustang GT was to paint a picture - we all recognize that as a fast car, and are perhaps surprised that modern sedan's are as fast - and often faster, while typically having a smaller (i.e. lighter) engine. Hell, look at the list of Mercede's on the same site (http://www.zeroto60times.com/Mercedes-Benz-0-60-mph-Times.ht...). There's cars on there coming in the 4 second range.

So - just wanted to point out that without more details, the story isn't complete, and perhaps not as surprising as first-pass suggests.

Re: Michael Hastings Sent Panicked Email Hours Before Car Crash

#210

Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Obviously I'm not saying that's the case, but the extremely irrational driving goes fits a theory of paranoid delusions (brought on by any number of mechanisms), just as the hacked car system goes with about to uncover something big.

What in the email seemed "paranoid" to you? may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues. "Obviously I'm not saying that's the case," Even saying it's likely takes sheer powers of rationalization I can't even fathom. And bringing up just that is what it is. This is like saying "no offense, but" and then saying s…

His email hinted at uncovering a grand plot. Lots of people who have mental issues think they've uncovered grand plots.

Even saying it's likely

I didn't say it was likely, I said it was possible (given that the outright acceptance of incredibly conspiracy theories are by far the most commonly discussed possibility). The difference is profound.

But really I think there are some people who seriously flunked basic probabilities. When considering the possibility that he a) was assassinated by rogue government agents who apparently both hacked his car and improvised explosives, or b) who had personal issues that led to irrational behavior, you are seriously saying that the former is more probable? Give me a break -- that is a seriously broken mental model.

Further the legend of this reporter has exploded into something completely detached from reality. His legacy is that he wrote an article for Rolling Stone magazine where a shooting-from-the-hip general who was a loudmouthed braggart (almost certainly because he was talking to a Rolling Stone reporter and wanted to be cool) got taken down for it. If you read the narrative on here, this reporter went deep in the NSA and hacked the special mainframe.

Post reply on HN