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

Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

getty.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–45 of 45 posts

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#41

Post by quasse »

moralestapia wrote: post #24
mystified5016 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yeah and what if you just forget to use your fancy equipment? Not so smart now, huh?!" You totally showed them

An observation on how this has become extremely common nowadays. Here, at work, in real life. People just argue with whatever dumb thing they can come up with, for the sake of arguing, it makes them feel smart. It's really hard to have a meaningful conversation with them. I go to a couple philosophical discussion groups and the occasional town hall meeting. People just can't get their imaginary needs satisfied. "But…

This is basically how every discussion around building more transit in Seattle goes. The town hall meetings feel like an episode of Parks and Rec.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#42

Post by weaksauce »

pwarner wrote: post #35
marze wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone with a fire-hardened house should be feeling good. If all Pacific Palisades houses were fire-hardened, the fire would have burned vegetation but few houses. Even modest fire hardening would help. If a wood-frame house burns, it is a danger to all nearby houses. Hardening reduces the chain reaction potential.

There's just not enough talk about this. This is the actual failure of government, not focusing enough on surviving fires

the cost would be enormous. it’s in an earthquake zone and it needs to withstand that. there’s already way too few houses for people at a reasonable cost. they’ve already evacuated and only a handful of lives have been lost to the people that stayed behind. it’s not normal santa ana winds it’s the hardest winds i’ve seen here in decades... probably 100 years or more. people are the important thing here.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#43

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #34
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, wildfires get incredibly hot. But the fires essentially always travel by embers or direct contact with fire - your comments about IR radiation seem to imply that IR alone will cause ignition, which is rarely if ever the case. Here is a story about a bunch of people who survived the Camp fire in Paradise, CA, surrounded by the raging inferno, by staying in the middle of a parking lot: https://www.firehouse.com/op…

It is rarely the case, indeed. However, in incidents like e.g. the Fort McMurray fire (Alberta, 2016), this is precisely what happens. One property with a heavy fuel load fanned by strong winds (i.e. plentiful O2 supply) gets hot enough that it causes ignition in a neighboring exposure. In Ft. McMurray, there were documented cases of an entire 4+ bedroom house being reduced to ash in roughly 5 minutes. The heat gener…

Even in that case I'm sure a huge part of the heat transfer is convection, especially with the high winds.

Comment I was replying to was talking about IR igniting things by shining through windows, which I believe is mostly bullshit.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#44

Post by Cheer2171 »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #20
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also relevant because the Getty Center has been rather smug about how awesome their fire protection is. I think your "smug" comment is unwarranted. They put a ton of solid engineering thought, money and planning into protecting the center from fire. Nothing is 100% but I think their confidence is warranted. Related, the Getty Villa right in the middle of the Palisades also put a lot of thought, planning and mo…

They are being really smug, talking about designs and systems that mean nothing when you've got temperatures outside the building hot enough to melt aluminum engine blocks, infrared radiation intense enough to set fire to things hundreds of feet away - as well as very low oxygen and very high CO/CO2 levels along with dozens of different toxic gasses - all of which HEPA filtration won't do squat about. A "stone facade…

Never have I seen a better case of projection on HN. You come off as so fucking smug yourself.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#45

Post by MichaelZuo »

moralestapia wrote: post #24
mystified5016 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yeah and what if you just forget to use your fancy equipment? Not so smart now, huh?!" You totally showed them

An observation on how this has become extremely common nowadays. Here, at work, in real life. People just argue with whatever dumb thing they can come up with, for the sake of arguing, it makes them feel smart. It's really hard to have a meaningful conversation with them. I go to a couple philosophical discussion groups and the occasional town hall meeting. People just can't get their imaginary needs satisfied. "But…

Isn’t it by definition that the median person making an argument will be mediocre?
Post reply on HN