Make sure you let your family know how much you care about them. Also make sure they will be taken care of in case you're suddenly gone. Firstly by picking up enough term life insurance to cover your dependents' needs until adulthood. Secondly by writing up a will and giving it to someone you trust. [1][2]
We joke about "getting hit by a bus" and a project's "bus factor"[3] but it really does happen. It could happen to you or to a critically important person on your project team. Make it a policy to have all critical info recorded in some systematic way. You don't have to get all iso9000 but you should, at the very least, have everyone do a brain dump into a wiki once a month and keep it in a central location (along with the password file, list of client info, etc.)
-
[1] DIY will: http://www.wikihow.com/Write-Your-Own-Last-Will-and-Testamen...
[2] Reasonably priced template: http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-wills/wills-overview.html
As an anecdote, there's a road that ends in an entrance/exit to a freeway that I use pretty frequently when driving from my home to Beirut. Two years ago, because the fact that the road was a 2-way road(people could use it to leave the freeway as well as enter it) was causing a lot of traffic they changed it into a 1-way road you could only use to enter the freeway, you had to leave from an exit further down the line. This reduced traffic jams immensely. However, before that could happen they had to go through several iterations on how to enforce this. First, a simple traffic sign was tried, this was largely ignored. Then they placed plastic barriers(those triangular things that can be filled with sand or water). Every night somebody would stop, get out of their car and move them to pass and things went back to how they were before the next day. Now they've closed it off with concrete barriers. It's working, but occasionally, especially at night, somebody will stop after the entrance, then back up into it and then use it as an exit. I once almost rear-ended someone doing that while I was going onto the freeway.
We have bad drivers here but I am willing to bet we exported the behaviour to Lebanon not the other way around.
Traffic rules create a useful abstraction but, if you want to be safe, the only non-leaky abstraction is seeing traffic as a collection of objects moving at various speeds which can optionally change acceleration or direction based on things like traffic lights / your presence / cats running across the road after the required reaction time has elapsed.
It's a bit less relaxing of a way to travel, but it sure as hell beats waking up in the hospital with brain damage, a leg whose foot no longer points in the direction it should and an arm that's no longer moving or ... not waking up at all.
The rules are: you imagine that you are literally invisible and find a way to cross the road that doesn't rely on the drivers' cooperation with you or the law. The drivers don't know you exist, because you are invisible.
Playing that game allowed me, for example, to jump onto the hood of a car that stopped at a red light briefly then hit the gas just as I walked in front of it. I was playing invisible man, as always, and had imagined what I would do if that guy, who was stopping, decided to take off again just as I got in front of his car. I imagined jumping onto his hood, which I did so quickly when he hit the gas that I landed on his windshield staring in at him with a grin on my face (instead of ending up under his tires.)
You can't protect yourself from everything, but playing the invisible man game each time you cross a street with traffic is a good strategy. I should add that I can't really play it if I'm on the phone, so I pause my call ("oh, um, hold on a second, I'll be right back"), play the game, and resume the call on the other side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places
Wish there were more.
So you get a disproportionate amount of car use by rich/influential people (including many politicians), and they have far more effect on public policy than the average person. Even if the right thing overall is to restrict automobile usage, any politician has to be very careful how he introduces such policies lest he quickly feel the wrath of the well-connected...
However, I will note: even if you follow this rule, be prepared to jump out of the way. I have to, and often. I walk 4 miles/day in city streets. The number of times I've had to jump out of the way when I had the right of way... ridiculous. Defensive walking or you won't be walking for long.
I used to drive through the intersection Andrew Scott Reisse was hit almost every day (until major road construction re-routed me). It's part of what strikes me as so random about this event. Unless he lived in one of the homes in that area, it puzzles me why he was walking through that intersection at that particular time of day. Unless, that is, he just really liked to walk and covered a lot of ground. In which case, this reminder is especially poignant.
My partner and I have a short commute so whenever we're crossing a street (often its one of the same cross-streets Andrew was hit in), I remind her: crossing this street is probably the most dangerous thing you're going to do this week. Put away the smart phone and pay attention like your life depends on it.
Can we please stop blaming the victims?
The main way to stop the carnage is to change our infrastructure. It's a political issue.
That said, regardless of the assignment of culpability and wrongdoing I think it is fundamentally important for pedestrians (namely: all people) to understand that it is with in their power to dramatically reduce their risk of injury by developing defensive habits. At the end of the day it doesn't matter if you died noble and innocent, dead is dead.
By the same token, it's not ok to blame children for sexual abuse, but it is smart to educate them about the dangers and to empower them with the skills to be able to avoid it.
What's the logical strategy in a police chase? Just keep driving after each other? It risks the lives of hundreds living and walking in the path of the chase all for the sake of punishing 1 or 2 individuals. It just doesn't seem to add up to me.
What a shame we lost someone so brilliant for nothing.
1) Now everybody runs when stopped by Police. OK, not everybody, but the rate has probably tripled.
2) After the police give up the chase, a member of the public is almost invariably killed at an intersection within 30s, since the offender is still driving at high speed but there are no longer any lights and sirens to warn the public.
3) Everyone - Police, media, politicians, the public - is genuinely confused as to why this keeps happening.
Basically, you can't win :(
i call BS, citation?
The fault is on the criminals, not on the police trying to apprehend them or the pursuit.
"When officers went to investigate, there was a physical altercation between police and 26-year-old Gerardo Diego Ayala that ended with a fatal officer-involved shooting."
The cops killed one of the suspects then pursued the rest, then a pedestrian died in the chase. But the fricken media did a great job phrasing things so the cops seemed justified, woo-hoo.
See:
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2013/05/santa_ana_pede...
(taken from further on this page, belongs further up btw)
It's not a universally accepted line of reasoning, even in communities across the US. But it's also not one just made up of whole cloth, 'for nothing'.
just as if for example, we felt the same way the police would be quite scared right now.
No police officer was killed. As far as I can tell the chase happened when three men fled police who had killed a fellow gang member.
There are several comments throughout this story about how police in [various enlightened areas] no longer do chases. It usually isn't so straightforward, otherwise the world's bank robbers and kidnappers will be on their way over, idling car at the standby.
What most police forces throughout the world have stopped doing is chases for trivial things (where the single most serious crime committed is not stopping for police), which has historically led to everyday people panicking when the police turn on the lights after they roll through a stop sign, etc. Police also try to resort to helicopters sooner, and abandon the chase if it's 2pm in a school zone, etc. However the nature of law enforcement means that chases still happen for serious incidents, and they happen around the world, some questionable accuracy claims in comments notwithstanding.
This is a terrible tragedy and it's unfortunate that this armchair speculation has taken the lead so quickly.
All officers must report how safe the chase is (cars on the road, weather conditions, pedestrians) and lying is a criminal offence. Also, officers who are part of a chase must be pursuit trained.
Here's the de facto manual all pursuit trained officers must be accustomed too:
http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2011/20110418%...
Example of a pursuit in the UK and notice the shock tactics at the end (smashing the passenger side window, dragging him from the car, etc) this is the to confuse and disorientate the man and makes sure he doesn't have time to get a weapon or destroy evidence.
This could be the result of a driver coming to one's senses, an erratic move resulting in a single car accident, or it could be the result of a police blockade with spikes or a PIT maneuver. The last is an example of one technique police departments employ to end police chases more safely.
What do you even say when stuff like this happens? He was a developer and in a way we never know when each of us will meet our ends.
He was 43 years old. Incredibly active, healthy and fit guy. He died of a very rare staph infection. By the time he was diagnosed, it was too late.
I think the lesson is that life is really short, and you never know when it will end. So you better make the most out of the time allotted to you, and the fact that you don't know how long you have left should only fuel your efforts.
R.I.P. Andrew.
http://code.google.com/p/vbjin-ovr/source/browse/oculus/Comm...
Seriously: there was nothing I could have done to avoid that. By the time I was reacting, the car was already on the sidewalk. It was luck. Yeah, be careful out there, sure. Can we have self-driving cars REALLY SOON PLEASE? I hear rumors that they work, and don't drink on the job.
I try to use that memory to motivate me if I'm procrastinating on something.
two vehicles full of people involved in some type of criminal activity
Was this yet another incident where the police self-escalated the situation?
I sure hope there was a precise reason this happened and not that "they smelled pot".
I'm sure the officers involved are second guessing their behavior now, its not like people die every day like this. But really, its a tough job, we aren't really in a position to judge.
So much so they had to pass laws to make it illegal for police to do chases in many cities/situations to stop them.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/police-chases-california-injured-10...
More bystanders are injured or killed during high-speed police chases than by stray bullets. In California, more than 10,000 people have been injured and over 300 people killed because of police chases in the last decade, according to newly released statistics from the California Highway Patrol.
Nationally, it's estimated nearly 300 people die each year as a result of high speed police chases.
It's debatable what to do in the aftermath, pursue (the instant gut reaction) or sit tight and hope that other officers in the vicinity can intervene. Usually it's the former, and the consequences seem to involve carnage in one way or another (obviously tragic in this case as an innocent bystander was killed).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law
Sometimes these criminals have nothing to lose, over even relatively insignificant infractions that will definitely result in life sentences. Not that I'm condoning criminal behavior in any way.
Secondly, my father has been an officer of the law for more than 25 years -- can we please not turn a thread which is being used to inform the community at large of a tragedy as a way to defame those who wish to do good in their community.
I ask out of respect of Reisse, and my good natured father that we keep at the very least this thread on topic.
This is an incredible cop-out. No pun intended.
Just because someone wishes to do good in their community does not mean they are immune to being criticized for their actions.
Furthermore, a lot of cops don't give a shit about doing good in their community. They are bullies who have joined the police force to legitimize their violent tendencies.
We need more "good cops" like your father, but let's face it: we will not get them if we do not draw people's attention to the bad stuff a lot of cops do.
Especially since internet discussions about police often turn into emotionally charged and hateful arguments, I think keeping the discussion focused on Reisse is a very good and respectful request.
To put it bluntly Reisse was hit by an automobile by a criminal. Should the police have pursued the suspect through a crowded city the way that they did? No, however no one here was at the scene; maybe they HONESTLY believed they could end the ordeal without a lengthy chase and without the suspect getting away. That's a judgement call that every law enforcement officer deals with from time to time; with human nature telling us that we can't be correct all the time.
The lot is a bunch of bullies who didn't want to grow up.
Except there's no point in this story if it's not turned into some general political discussion about random aspect of society.
The template of these types of headlines is "Random incident happened to semi-famous tech dude". Therefore it's going to turn into some kind of "Let's discuss policy surrounding random incident".
Generally, these are just bad stories.
Can someone share how Reisse was involved w/ the Oculus Rift? Looking at the company's profile[1], it makes no mention of Reisse, and lists Luckey as the "Founder".
Even searching their site[2] makes no mention of Reisse, other than a recent discussion[3] about his untimely death. And those discussions seem to only refer to him as an "employee".
Is calling him "co-founder" in the title truly accurate?
[1] http://www.oculusvr.com/company/
[2] http://www.google.com/search?q=reisse+site%3Aoculusvr.com
[3] https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&...
He could have been moonlighting for them, he may have helped come up with the original idea, or work with the company to solve some of the core design challenges.
Just because his title wasn't co-founder doesn't mean he wasn't as important as any other founder or early employee.
I couldn't find mention of this anywhere, so I was assuming the submitter knew some history of him that I couldn't find on their site.
Just a really sad turn of events.
That doesn't necessarily mean the officer was shot.
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2013/05/santa_ana_pede...
He died of his injuries. His name was Gerardo Diego Ayala.
> Investigators allege 21-year-old Victor Sanchez and two
> other suspects then took off in a Dodge Charger. With
> Sanchez at the wheel, the Charger slammed into two
> vehicles during the pursuit before hitting Reisse, police
> said.
It's not "be more careful when crossing the street". Being a super-defensive pedestrian might have saved Andrew Reisse, but that's not the main point. It's not "don't have high speed chases". Perhaps different police policies might have averted this tragedy, but that's not the main point, either.
The main point is that roving paramilitary gangs rule large swathes of Santa Ana, California, and virtually every other big city in America. These gangs have not been broken because the police lack the mandate to break them. (My father consulted for the Santa Ana police department for nearly 30 years; they feel powerless against the gangs.) The gangs probably wouldn't last a week against a vigorous application of military-grade force, but such an application of force is politically untenable at present. This means that the current political system itself is complicit.
Don't blame the pedestrian or the police. Blame the gangs and the system that protects them.
No... they would last much longer than a week. I'm going to recommend some reading to you:
http://www.amazon.com/Marine-Corps-Counterinsurgency-Field-M...
You don't go into neighborhoods, kicking in doors with guns blazing. They recently did that in Detroit to serve a warrant. Post Mortem: 1 dead 6 year old girl, 1 injured 72 year old grandmother, 0 arrests.
Think of it this way...
For every enemy, or (gang member), you kill, you create one. For every innocent you kill in pursuit of a gang member, you create 10 enemies. (Keep in mind, the people in the neighborhood KNOW who is innocent, even if you don't.)
These are hard problems. They defy simple solutions. In fact, the application of simple solutions to this PARTICULAR class of problems only creates more problems.
http://www.civilwarhome.com/liebercode.htm
It describes the code (developed by Prussian jurist Francis Lieber) used by the victorious Union to suppress armed opposition ("insurgency") in the defeated Confederacy after the end of the American Civil War. If you compare its prescriptions to those in the "modern" counterinsurgency manual you linked to, you will see why the Union succeeded where present efforts fail.
You don't go into neighborhoods, kicking in doors with guns blazing. They recently did that in Detroit to serve a warrant.
No, you start by declaring martial law and enforcing a curfew. Santa Ana's gangs are a military problem, and they demand a military solution. If you're serving warrants, you've already lost the battle.
I understand that this is off the political map. That's the point. The kinds of policies needed to successfully defeat these gangs are anathema to prevailing civil libertarian views. But civilized 4th Amendment–style liberties only work when basic conditions of law & order hold; they don't work in a war. Indeed, when applied in a war, they only make things worse. This is why the present system, which serves warrants to soldiers in the opposing army, is complicit in their crimes.
Maybe it would take a month or two to break them instead of a week, but the point remains—such a gang could be crushed on a timescale tiny compared to how long they've existed. The key would be to use, not "modern" counterinsurgency theory, but rather forgotten tactics that actually work.
Pretty much every organization I've worked for was missing a "key developer got hit by bus" plan for at least one major project.
1) A new key developer would be hired to maintain the project, and things would be a little rough for a couple months but the company would survive.
2) Every decent person would care more about the key developers life than the "major project".
This so called "bus factor" has always bugged me. Documentation is good, but talk of untimely death by bus is silly.
The reference to untimely death by bus strike is an example of macabre geek humour; not a serious suggestion that the greatest threat to developers is posed by motorized mass transportation.
Most often developers leave projects -- and especially open source projects -- for far more banal reasons: They move to a different position and don't have the time or inclination to continue maintaining their old code.
Can someone else get access to all the company-owned code the developer was working on? Is someone insisting that the developer doesn't keep three months of work on a laptop? Who else can get access to the passwords and keys for company-owned servers and services maintained by the developer?
The idea isn't so much about being hit by a bus as "what would we do if a key contributor were to vanish off the face of the Earth with no notice or warning?" If the specific idea of the Death Bus seems too grim, feel free to replace it with another deus ex machina that would have the same effect (alien abduction, Christian rapture, surprise release of a new season of Firefly, etc.).
I tend to approach it from a different angle. Be brilliant and live your life now, you may not get the chance to do so later. It sounds like he was doing awesome things, so one can only hope that his work lives on.
My condolences to Andrew's family.
The HN headline is still many times more informative than the linked article's headline, "Santa Ana police chase: Pedestrian identified." Even considering the newspaper's audience (who, unlike HN, might not know or care enough about Oculus Rift to merit its mention by name in the headline), the fact that the pedestrian was killed by a gang while the gang was trying to escape police would presumably still be of interest.
Condolences to the family and Oculus team.
It is kind of morbid, but This is going to turn into an interesting case study on how a company stays afloat when a major influence is removed from the picture.
RIP Andrew Reisse
Very sad. Rest in peace.
Because you never cared about non-great ones. Observer bias.
People aren't equal, you can't make it so by saying it.
The man who died was more significant than the man who killed him.
And of course no mention of the officers name.
I'm guessing you think a police officer was killed, because of the ambiguous (I would say misleading) wording of the article. Or are you saying you want the name of the officer that killed Gerardo Diego Ayala?
Not to harm him, I just want to show his family the picture of the guy their father helped kill.
What would you prefer to happen?
If we must spend the money, at least spend it on somebody who deserves it.
The police have a job to do, but in some areas, the level of aggression with which they pursue their duties is beyond reasonable and seems like adrenaline addiction.
He was hit by a car.