Kyoto Animation artworks go on display nationwide in remembrance of arson attack | Hacker News Reader

Kyoto Animation artworks go on display nationwide in remembrance of arson attack

japantimes.co.jp

146 pointsmeruru41 comments

I've been trying to get this story on the frontpage for a while. I'm glad it finally made it.

Details of the arson attack: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Animation_arson_attack

GoFundMe campaign: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-kyoani-heal

Kyoto Animation is without a doubt the best 2D animation studio in the world. Not only were they raising the bar in terms of quality of their work, but they were also setting an example for the rest of the industry with better working conditions for their employees.

Here's an in-depth article about them: https://blog.sakugabooru.com/2018/08/25/the-evolution-of-kyo...

Hopefully they can recover from this tragedy to keep creating new masterpieces.

Correct link for GoFundMe: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-kyoani-heal

Information for donation via direct bank transfer: http://www.kyotoanimation.co.jp/information/?id=3075 (The bank info is in English)

Fixed the link, thanks.

Some people have also suggested purchasing digital goods from their online shop: http://kyoanishop.com/ Instructions here: https://twitter.com/gokunobaka/status/1151813889362989056

Agreed.

Also please donate if you can to help the families of those that lost loved ones and those injured that will likely face a lifetime of disability.

There's no widow or disability welfare in Japan?

Regardless whether there is some form of welfare to help widows or the disabled in Japan there's nothing wrong with extending a helping hand; it's the human thing to do in the face of tragedy. Are you suggesting that this is unnecessary?

I was curious if Japanese government offered it.

Is this really the place for studio wars? I can appreciate your desire to praise Kyoto Animation given the circumstances, but perhaps it would be better to phrase it "one of the best 2D animation studios".

EDIT: "one of the best" does not preclude Kyoto Animation from being "the best", but it makes it clear that you're not insulting all the other studios.

Just my opinion.

There was no "war" until you called attention to it and ostensibly took the other side of it. Your comment creates the exact thing you're supposedly wary of and I'm not sure what else it possibly adds.

"Without a doubt the best 2D animation studio in the world" is logically equivalent to "without a doubt every other 2D animation studio is worse". This is needlessly confrontational, and "without a doubt" does not sound like it's just an opinion.

Is this really the time and place for your pedantry?

What? A war. What the actual fuck. How about you just wouldn't be salty about what other people think about cartoon drawings.

The phrase is analogous to "editor wars", and I am not the first to use it. Imagine for a moment that somebody murdered Richard Stallman. Would it be appropriate to eulogize him as "author of Emacs, which is without a doubt the best editor in the world"? To me that looks a lot like exploiting the tragedy to score points in a comparatively unimportant argument. Nobody can bring up other candidates for best editor without looking insensitive.

It's possible to praise a person or organization's accomplishments without putting down others. Kyoto Animation certainly deserves such praise. But there is no need to start ranking studios.

What he wrote wasn't anything official like a eulogy. It was a hackernews post. God forbid someone writes an opinion in one those...

How does "official" status (which is in any case not required for the verb "eulogize") have any relevance to whether it's appropriate to challenge people in a context where they can't respond to that challenge without breaking social obligations? If I say "Emacs is without a doubt the best editor", then I naturally expect Vi fans to defend their favorite editor. There is in fact doubt, and they can surely come up with reasons why Vi could be considered better. But if I make my claim when any defense of Vi would be downvoted for distracting from more important issues then I am not arguing in good faith.

He didn't challenge anyone. If you express your opinion "Emacs is without a doubt the best editor" in some other context related to Emacs then you aren't challenging anyone. You are simply expressing an opinion. Opinions don't have to be challenged. I read hundreds of opinions every day and guess what: some of them I don't agree with. That doesn't mean they are declarations of war or anything of the sort. It also doesn't mean I have to fight that opinion.

Most opinions are not stated in a way that reads identical to a claim of factually superior rank. If I say "Emacs is my favorite editor" that is not challenging anybody. "Emacs is an excellent editor" is not challenging anybody either. But "Emacs is best without a doubt" leaves no room for any other editor to be best, and leaves no room for dismissal of the statement as just subjective opinion, so it is a direct challenge to all competitors.

The vast majority of all opinions are stated as a factual claim. Especially in an informal settings like you know a hackernews thread.

I said specifically "a claim of factually superior rank". Just an opinion stated as fact is not the same thing. E.g. I looked at all the comments for the highest scoring article currently on the front page ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531987 ). I found opinions stated as fact, but none that simultaneously deprecated anything else.

An opinion that deprecates something else is just a subset of all opinions. It doesn't deserve special care.

All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions. Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context.

> All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions.

Yes and? why repeat something obvious.

> Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context.

An opinion itself can never be confrontational. It's a person that takes it as a confrontation. Just like offense is taken not given.

>Yes and? why repeat something obvious.

To illustrate that your response was a tautology, and therefore it did not contribute to your argument.

>An opinion itself can never be confrontational.

But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you. And it is not a fair argument if I say it in a context where you can't reply without punishment.

> But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you.

That's not a challenge. It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion. I can't even fathom going through life seeing everything somebody else likes as a thread to something I like.

>It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion.

I am not objecting to differing opinions, or confrontation. I am objecting to the combination of three specific things:

* An opinion expressed as fact

* which deprecates something

* under unusual circumstances which prevent supporters of the thing being deprecated from responding as they would otherwise be able to

This is clearly violating the rules of fair argument. It is very far from "everything", and I don't recall ever seeing it on HN before.

There is no argument. That's what you are missing. Someone expressing his opinion is not equal to starting an argument, in any context. Starting the argument is the person who actually starts the argumentation process.

>Someone expressing his opinion is not equal to starting an argument, in any context.

Expressing an opinion as though it is fact, in such a way as to deprecate something or someone, is an attempt to start an argument, whether intentional or not. Anybody associated with the thing being deprecated risks loss of social status, and it is natural human instinct to want to avoid that. If I say "I'm right and you're wrong", that is an attempt to start an argument. In most contexts it would be entirely reasonable for you to reply disputing it, and nobody would claim your were "starting an argument" by doing so. The one who makes the deprecating claim is the one who starts the argument, not the one who replies.

I do not object to argument per se. Arguments can be a valuable part of discussion. But if I say "I'm right and you're wrong" in a context where any attempt you make to defend yourself would be downvoted no matter whether it was correct or not, then that is the wrong context to make the claim. There is no value to an argument under such conditions.

> I've been trying to get this story on the frontpage for a while. I'm glad it finally made it.

In case you missed it, the initial story of the attack made the front page at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20468395

I often find it’s difficult to keep track of what has and hasn’t charted, so to speak, on this site. You can’t blame the parent for wanting to draw attention to this tragic story.

Hckrnews.com or similar sites help in that regard

The building did not have fire sprinklers, nor indoor fire hydrants due to its classification as a small office building

Hopefully that will change after this. Safety regulations are written in blood, as the saying goes.

From the looks of it, neither of those things would've helped. I understand they became unconscious from the smoke within seconds: https://files.catbox.moe/ge9y2l.jpg https://files.catbox.moe/93y1xh.webm

An exhaust would've helped.

Sprinklers on the ground floor might have helped? But yes, either automatic fire exhaust fans or fire-resistant doors would have helped a lot, as exist in new buildings.

On the ground floor I imagine the water would just mix with the gasoline and spread it faster.

Sprinklers are not sized to work simultaneously and building codes dont handle arsons. The size if the system would be enormous. Adequate escape routes (e.g. to the roof) could be more helpful.

The roof is rarely a good escape route unless there are several ladders going down the ground. Even then, in my country, this would likely not pass inspection as 30meters of horizontal and 30 meters of vertical movement are the maximum for fire escape routes to a safe place (ie, a fire shielded stair case with no fire hazards, which requires special doors and monitoring that no flammable materials are stored there plus ventilation, or simply the outside of the building on the ground).

The roof is dangersou because if the fire gets too large, the fire fighters will be forced to switch from extinguish to control and the roof might be burned down. If nobody notices you up there or equipment to get you down takes too long, you're screwed. On the ground you can get more distance.

Sprinklers would've at least slowed the spread of the fire even if they weren't able to extinguish (this is a common misconception --- not all sprinkler systems are designed to extinguish fires.) Water has a very high heat capacity and large amounts of it will help keep the temperature from rising.

Yes, the water will cause damage, which may be why they decided against sprinklers in the first place, but arguably the fire damage is worse.

Hopefully… It’s kinda crazy how the fire department said the studio had “sufficient” fire prevention measures.

Someone walking in with 40L of gasoline is not something that fire prevention measures really take into consideration.

At this point, Kyoto Animation is accepting direct international bank (SWIFT) transfers as donations. See https://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-news/2019/07/24-1/kyoto-an... (http://www.kyotoanimation.co.jp/information/?id=3075 is the link from Kyoto Animation themselves) for details.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com