Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Living 800 feet above the city (nytimes.com)
89 points by Turukawa on June 10, 2016 | hide | past | favorite | 33 comments



A complete aside, but the photography of Jimmy Chin is amazing, and the top photo in this article is no exception. His technical skills, both with his camera and his outdoorsmanship, lead to some of the most remarkable and unique images that have ever been captured. And I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a picture that I thought was fabulous only to discover that it was he who took it.

Anyone who's interested in photography or enthralled by nature and action sports should take a web journey through his images. He'll take you around the world and to places you could never visit yourself.


I would also highly recommend the movie Meru, which is briefly mentioned in this article. It's a great documentary that shows the crazy shit he (more than willingly) goes through to get some of his shots.


Thanks for this suggestion! I'm halfway through, and I'm loving it.

I will never make that trek.


“Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots down there stopped moving forever?”

It's the ultimate expression of looking down on the little people.


To be fair, it's a quote from a film noir [1], not one of the interviewees.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Man


“While taking a piss in the men's room, I stare into a thin, web-like crack above the urinal's handle and think to myself that if I were to disappear into that crack, say somehow miniaturize and slip into it, the odds are good that no one would notice I was gone. No...one...would...care. In fact some, if they noticed my absence, might feel an odd, indefinable sense of relief. This is true: the world is better off with some people gone. Our lives are NOT all interconnected. That theory is a crock. Some people truly do not NEED to be here.” ― Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho


Unfortunately you see the same disregard when looking horizontally across the globe. The death of an American is almost always given considerably more American media coverage than the regular atrocities taking place in other countries. Should proximity make what has happened any more or less significant?


Or generically "The death of a local is almost always given considerably more local media coverage than the regular atrocities taking place in foreign countries."

Of course proximity matters. With absolutely no judgement on the victims, I'd rather have updated news about a serial killer in my neighborhood as opposed to one in Germany.


News about street maintenance in my neighborhood is more important to me than some serial killer on the other side of the world.

How would the serial killer affect my life? Would my life even be better after having read details of his grisly crimes (probably not)?. On the other hand if parking will be forbidden on near my house for a day while they re-surface the street it is something that will actually affect me.


I'm guessing you are American and in the US? Here in New Zealand the death of an American gets just about as much airtime as the death of a local. Your news matters way more than any other country's news. It seems to be a combination of who owns the news outlet and the strange media hysteria that outlets foster when something tragic/gross/unusual happens.


1) media is about money.

2) money is acquired by advertising or subscription.

3) ads or subscriptions need people to read/view and to continue to do that.

4) the best way to influence someone to do that is through emotions.

4) news articles are selected or spun in a way that instills/increases emotions in a targeted audience.

5) if someone in Tibet gets hit by a truck then it is unlikely to produce a reaction to someone in NY.

6) if the demographically relevant person is hit by a truck related to an already unfavorable organization outside an apartment building in NY then that will have a much more likely emotional response and so will be that much more likely to be reported.

this applies to 99% of media, regardless of whether it is politics, crime or sports.

tl;dr = money.


But closeness (in relation, geographically, or even in time) to those affected affect how you feel about their deaths. It's because their death probably affects your life more.

It'd be absurd for one to lament the death of every national equally, or for you to mourn the loss of those from Boston Massacre to Boston Marathon bombing equally.


So if given the choice to save a hundred strangers one state away or a thousand strangers in Sudan, which would you choose?


> Should proximity make what has happened any more or less significant?

Yes, in the eyes of those further away.



If something is significant, then proximity won't matter -- so if you're even asking that question, you're only asking it about the insignificant things.


Estimates place the death toll from the conflict in Syria at about half a million, but your evening newscast likely caps each night's broadcast off with a puff piece about a found dog that had gone missing, or some good deed a local middle-school kid did for his neighbor. If that same slaughter were happening in your home-town, do you think it'd be significant? Don't you still think it's more significant than the puff piece even though it's happening on the other side of the planet? It's certainly easier to ignore things that are further from our field of view, but I don't think it makes them any less significant unless each person ignores the larger world around them.


And Mao Zedong killed maybe 70 million people.

Significance is not an objective universal measure. Those deaths in Syria are insignificant. There are 8 Billion + people on this planet. Maybe they'd be significant if they were pandas or tigers or something. And that's a workable perspective.


> Those deaths in Syria are insignificant

To you. And wow.


All politics (and all news) is "local".


How dare the American media and the American public be more concerned about their own?

Yes proximity matters a lot. Now - if lets say Elbonian media was more concerned with American lives than Elbonian ones - it would be a valid critic.

Also - one of the cornerstones of the world order is that whatever a country does in its internal affair is their own business.

To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right.


"To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right." It's a right here in New Zealand. We have laws on it any everything.


I don't think there is law that states a new Zealander should care about south sudan.


I love this picture, of the very top of the Burj Khalifa in Dubai (currently the world's tallest structure!): http://i.imgur.com/YpANIiK.jpg

No, not Tom Cruise. The graffiti!


It's probably signatures of the construction workers who worked on that section, rather than graffiti.


This article references the project I have been working on for the last few years. 10 Hudson Yards. AMA

Proof: https://www.instagram.com/p/BGetG8olfPJ/


I've been watching the building go up from 20th and Tenth, nice job.

Is the portion of the High Line that runs through the building going to be a public space (or a POPS)?


How does it feel to be just under the 800ft line? Does article make you wish you could have added just a few more floors? ;)

In all seriousness - I've never been to nyc (never had a reason to I guess). I just don't comprehend the demand to build up. Is there really that much demand? Like at what density level does other infrastructure become a bottleneck (transit/power/water/food)?


>Is there really that much demand?

Sure, in any city with lots of people and limited land, island cities especially. Manhattan is one, Hong Kong another.

>Like at what density level does other infrastructure become a bottleneck (transit/power/water/food)?

Good question, would be interested to see studies on this too.


The higher you go, the quieter it gets :)


Guess I am fortunate to be terrified of heights, no chance of any jealousy or envy on my part.

I do have to ask with regards to that 453 sq ft apartment, whats the point of having a window that opens at its height?

on a side note, the gated communities of suburbia are nothing but shallow imitations of the these vertical communities which are even more exclusive


> I do have to ask with regards to that 453 sq ft apartment, whats the point of having a window that opens at its height?

The same purpose of a window in any tower--fresh air.


Or the feeling of freedom that it gives you!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: