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

Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

kirotv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–227 of 227 posts

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#221

Post by BuckRogers »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #52
Chevalier wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using SV as shorthand for the tech industry generally -- and Redmond is very much to Seattle what Silicon Valley is to San Francisco. Car-dependent suburbia that threatens the health, safety, and quality-of-life of everyone forced to be there. San Francisco is as walkable as the West Coast gets, which alone testifies to the disgrace of American urban planning. Ey would have been killed long ago if he dared to rid…

I actually agree with this response. Because of Microsoft, Seattle has become Silicon Valley North, just the same as NYC has become the Silicon Alley and Chicago is... whatever they're calling Chicago now. All of them are similar, heavy car usage, not enough walking, and no safety for humans. Google is trying to solve it by making smarter cars. How about we solve it by making our communities smarter instead?

Chicago here... it's anything than "car city". I haven't had a car in a decade. I'm not sure you've actually lived in any of these areas. It's possible to live without a car in only a few cities, and Chicago and NYC are two of them.

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#223

Post by guiambros »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #139
guiambros wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Heavy car usage" , in NYC? After decades living in real car-only cities (Atlanta, Miami, Sao Paulo), I'm glad to live car-free in NYC. And considering family and small child. While gentrification continues to push people away from Manhattan, you still have decent options of public transportation to everywhere around here. We can criticize NY for many things, but being a 'car city' is not one of them. Anyway, I reall…

I've never been to NYC, but every depiction I've seen of it grid lock and seas of yellow cabs, and cabs have been known to hit people too.

Underneath the sea of yellow cabs you have a very efficient subway system, connecting the entire city to its 5 boroughs. And you also have a decent railroad system, connecting Manhattan to nearby cities.

It's true that some areas are not properly served through subway, and you have to rely on bus. But it is still an order of magnitude better than some of the cities mentioned above.

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#224

Post by hobarrera »

coffeemug wrote: post #104
Chevalier wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it's any more or less tragic, but I've always been astonished that Silicon Valley is so car-dependent. We've concentrated the most brilliant minds in the world in this small area... and then force everyone to pilot two-ton bullets to pick up groceries? Not all workers can demand decent living conditions, but you'd think the competitive draw for workers in Silicon Valley would entice company towns to, I don't…

> Not all workers can demand decent living conditions You're assuming that car-oriented urban planning is synonymous with poor living conditions, which isn't true. A lot of people (most?) in the U.S. actually prefer it -- for many people the perceived convenience of cars beats public transportation and biking.

> for many people the perceived convenience of cars beats public transportation and biking.

That clearly proves the the public transporation is pretty bad, which is indicates that living conditions can improve.

The need for a car is also an indicator that living conditions can improve. I don't live in a very well-designed city (far from it!), but I seldom have to go far enough to require a bus or subway, walking being usually enough (plenty of restaurants and cafes in a 600 metre radius, for example).

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#225

Post by zo1 »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #102
zo1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here wanting to know the same thing. I'm not exactly clued-up on accidents and cars, etc. But it seems highly odd that one can just die from being rear-ended by a car (even if it's going 100)? The only thing I can think of is that the breaks were on, so his body/head whip lashed forward badly or something. Anyone have any other theories about this sad event?

You can see it easily from the story. Ey's car spun around the road into a concrete wall. Malsch, the drunk driver, had his car stay on the road, just suffering front end damage from hitting Ey. In all the videos, Ey's car looks absolutely demolished while Malsch's looks like just a rough accident.

Thanks for the info, didn't notice it earlier!

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#226

Post by hobarrera »

VLM wrote: post #47
Chevalier wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it's any more or less tragic, but I've always been astonished that Silicon Valley is so car-dependent. We've concentrated the most brilliant minds in the world in this small area... and then force everyone to pilot two-ton bullets to pick up groceries? Not all workers can demand decent living conditions, but you'd think the competitive draw for workers in Silicon Valley would entice company towns to, I don't…

This article is being flooded with weird anti-car hate. Yet, my car is perfectly safe and can only kill someone in a hit and run at 100 MPH if, and only if, I get drunk first. Given that I don't drink very much and then only at home (a sixer lasts me about a season, sometimes half a year) that means my car is incredibly safe and will almost certainly never kill anyone. Odd how there's no anti-alcohol hate here on HN,…

False. Anywhere above 40km/h can kill a pedestrain. That's why speed limits in cities are usually around that value.

Re: Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run

#227

Post by Turing_Machine »

ild wrote: post #170
Turing_Machine wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A safe area of Brooklyn is at least 250,000 people; actually perhaps 400,000 or so." Fine. Show me a "safe area" of Brooklyn that has a crime rate of 6 "Where? Cannot see anything like that on the map you linked." I should have said other suburbs in the same area. For example, Westlake. "Please, educate me how to (cherry)pick a representative suburb." Well, for a start you don't pick out the one with the highest cri…

> Fine. Show me a "safe area" of Brooklyn that has a crime rate of 6 6? No, I cannot. May be somewhere on Mars. But according to city-data, overall crime rate in NYC was 256.1, so in the safer parts of Brooklyn it should be not more than this number; and it is lower than average for US. And 6 is actually an artifact , erroneous number because... > http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/c... ...acc…

You can spin as hard as you want, but the fact remains that people with families move to the suburbs for what they see as quality of life reasons.

Besides crime, people want to have yards for their kids to play in, rather than some littered public park full of drunks and discarded hypodermic needles.

They want their kids to be able to have bedrooms of their own.

They want to own a car (with the concommitant freedom to travel as they wish, when they wish) without paying outrageous parking fees (if parking is even available).

They want to have a kitchen and dining room for family gatherings.

They want any number of things that are either exorbitantly expensive or flat unobtainable in urban environments.

The key takeaway here is that you don't get to choose for other people.

They move to the suburbs because that's where they want to live.

I realize that this conflicts with your opinion on how people ought to live, but that's how it is. Sorry.

Post reply on HN