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

Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

nopromiseofsafety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#31

Post by glurgh »

nathanb wrote: post #26
Xcelerate wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I never saw the Mythbusters show. Why would a 300-foot fall into water definitely kill you? I know the world dive record is 172 feet. And terminal velocity for a human is about 120 mph. I imagine if you make yourself flat for most of the fall you could lower that speed and then right before you hit the water take a "pencil" position. Would you not at least have some chance of surviving that?

Water is noncompressible. Maybe the word "definitely" was misused because there's always the possibility for a fluke, but my understanding is that at terminal velocity hitting water is functionally equivalent to hitting concrete. Look up the "hammer drop" episode of Mythbusters if you want to see the long explanation. The second point still stands, though. I'd rather fall onto the concrete, where I could get help qui…

In a 300 foot fall, you're not reaching the bottom at terminal velocity. Mythbusters have in fact gone over this a few times and the results are a bit different - falling from such a height onto more or less anything is almost certainly lethal. Given equivalent height, even at terminal velocity, you're still slightly better off falling into water.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#32

Post by dkokelley »

I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing "forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of the bridge, not only would he die, but he would risk the safety of others driving across the bridge. Even in the best-case where he doesn't hit a vehicle or cause an accident, the morning commute is screwed up because of what on the surface appears to be another suicide.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#33

Post by akama »

singlow wrote: post #18
nsxwolf wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not afraid of heights, you're afraid of falling. To me, NOT being afraid of heights is irrational.

I love falling. It's hitting the ground that I'm afraid of.

This reminds me of an old joke. How do you survive a 100 foot fall? Jump off a 110 foot building.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#34

Post by akama »

singlow wrote: post #18
nsxwolf wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not afraid of heights, you're afraid of falling. To me, NOT being afraid of heights is irrational.

I love falling. It's hitting the ground that I'm afraid of.

This reminds me of an old joke. How do you survive a 100 foot fall? Jump off a 110 foot building.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#35

Post by steveax »

nathanb wrote: post #16
shawabawa3 wrote: post #11

> In a choice between a 300-foot-fall to water and a 30-foot-fall to concrete the winner is discernable if not immediately clear I'm guessing the correct choice is the concrete, but for some reason I feel like I would still prefer to go for the water...

This is why I love the TV show Mythbusters: they routinely demonstrate how our intuition on these matters is wrong. (A 30-foot fall onto concrete might still kill you, but a 300-foot fall into water will definitely kill you. And if the fall onto concrete doesn't kill you, it will be much easier to get you the medical attention you need if you're not floating in San Francisco Bay).

Not to mention when the fall knocks you out, you won't drown on concrete, unlike landing in the water.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#36

Post by devb »

Ricapar wrote: post #7
gesman wrote: post #4

This is lovely and amazing! 90% of chance of law enforcement to be in touch with you soon, unfortunately. This is akin posting Youtube video of yourself breaking legal speed limits.

Just FYI: Date: February 24, 2011 If they haven't given him a call by now, they probably don't care at this point.

No, I know people who get arrested for stuff like this years after the fact.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#37

Post by devb »

aroch wrote: post #20
ultimoo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder whether the statute of limitations applies to such things. I hope it does.

It'd be trespass and other crimes on federal properly, so 5 years, no?

How is it federal property? It's owned and operated by an independent quasi-governmental organization.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#38

Post by DanBC »

dkokelley wrote: post #32

I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing "forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of the bridge, not only would he die, but he would…

People committing suicide would tend to jump off the bridge into the water? There are, very roughly, one person committing suicide per fortnight from the Goldengate Bridge.

One idea to slow down that number o fdeaths is to install a big net. It'll hurt when people land on it, and that might be enough to snap them out of the impulsive decision to end their lives.

The net would cost about $45m.

Some people might feel that spending the money on mental health services and suicide prevention services would be a better investment.

(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/us/26bcjames.html?pagewant...)

Superficially it's obvious why Fresno CA has such a high suicide rate (14.8 per 100,000) - low employment, high crime, staggering drug (especially meth) addiction. But Sacramento CA has higher rates of suicide (22.7 per 100,000), and it's not as easy to work out why.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#39

Post by thaumasiotes »

nsxwolf wrote: post #21
roryokane wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am afraid of heights, even when I am not afraid of falling. I dislike being on a high balcony even if I am ten feet away from the edge, with a trustworthy railing there. That's the way my body works - the fear is left over from more primitive times, before high places had windows and railings.

I'm afraid of low railings on high balconies. I don't understand why they build railings that are below the center of rotation of the average person.

I've been complaining about this for years. I want a railing that will stop me from falling over the edge if I get into that situation, not one that will merely ensure I go over headfirst.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#40

Post by base698 »

I have been BASE jumping for quite a while and within that community there is a strong thread of leave no trace. It reduces the legal risk, eliminates property damage, and keeps it open for everyone else.

Back to Joe, I found his blog and saw a picture of him setting off fireworks on top of a crane I had just climbed and jumped in the city I used to live. I kept thinking the increased security probably should have led to my arrest since setting off fireworks isn't exactly stealth and if I was property owner and found that I'd definitely be horrified enough to increase security. I tracked him down and took him out to an antenna for him to climb and photograph warning him what could happen if he kept posting so publicly. He was eventually was arrested for this:

http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=311

He was an interesting dude. Modified a car to have a skin of bottle caps all over it. He does not walk to the beat of normal society's drum.

Post reply on HN