Hacker News Reader

Comment by senorjazz | Hacker News Reader

> Give helicopter tours to rich people

No, don't. Providing the most polluting form of transport to somewhere isolated and tranquil for profit, to allow the rich and lazy to get there in a day trip is disgusting. But hey they are rich, let them ruin it for others who made an effort to get there. The rich are what we should all aspire to as the ultimate form of success and happiness, right?

I find the constant hustle to find an angle to monetise something quite sad. Especially when aimed solely at the rich to the detriment of everyone else.

Why does everything need to be exploited? Sanitised? Made safe. You undertake something dangerous, then death is a possibility that is understood. Just accept it.

View on HN

Interesting, I read this as sort of the opposite, not exploitation, but irony. The people who are doing a pilgrimage for their own journey rather than the popularized destination will find other interesting places and stop crowding into one dangerous locale for a while so it cools down. People who just want an Instagram selfy with the bus will get their fill without annoying the locals so much.

Strangely, destroying the desirability by offering helicopter rides in the short term may save it as a destination for the truly intrepid in the future.

>You undertake something dangerous, then death is a possibility that is understood. Just accept it.

You dont live in an isolated bubble. You will call for help if lost or injured and it will be up to others to either take on the grueling task of mounting a rescue in such conditions or leaving you for dead while you beg for help on the radio. In reality they will have no choice but to put them self in danger to rescue an adventure tourist. With the given example of the magic bus its volunteer firefights who have to rescue these tourists.

the same way as when they are in danger they will know someone else will try to save them, it's a society.

Except you dont put yourself recklessly in danger on purpose for fun relying on rescue infrastructure meant for accidents. Being reckless is not an accident nor should it be an emergency.

I dont really see a difference to Everest tourism, where people push beyond their limits to reach the top hoping that someone will get them down again. And then there is an outcry when they cant be helped, like the media spectacle around David Sharp. He went up there without oxygen and people saw him dying right on the track unable to get him down.

If you value your life so little its your choice, but please consider what that does to people who have to leave you begging or getting them to gamble their own life to save you.

"reckless" is an insult used to demean the victims, it's not objective. One day it's reckless the other day it's courageous, it all depends on wether you want to insult or glorify the people, there is no objective measure.

If you voluntarily come ill-prepared into a life threatening situation to have fun you are reckless and selfish. It risks not just your life but the lives of the people around you.

Glorifying this sort of behavior is completely irresponsible.

edit: Did you reflect about how some people might take your posts here as a motivation for a grand adventure? Not thinking about it to much and just breaking out of the daily grind and experiencing the magic bus?

edit2: I mean this is really beyond me, if anyone is actually thinking about doing something like this, think for one moment what you would tell the family of a rescuer who might die trying to save you from your own stupidity. That you are sorry?

> allow the rich and lazy to get there in a day trip is disgusting.

I can understand being against the pollution, but aside from that, how can what the "rich and lazy" do bother you in any way? People harming the environment should bother you equally whether they're rich or poor, lazy or industrious.

> I find the constant hustle to find an angle to monetise something quite sad.

You realize you're on Hacker News, right?

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Monetization of something as a goal to be the next billion dollar unicorn vs monetization of something useful as a lifestyle product are different paths that cater to a majority of people who frequent HN. But constant hustle to find an angle is another part of it. In some cases people find the next thing organically, and then you have others constantly trying to slam the square peg in a round hole. It seems as though the latter is more often focused on acquiring wealth to be rich rather than having a passion for a tangible product/solution.

often focused on acquiring wealth to be rich rather than having a passion for a tangible product/solution

There's nothing wrong with it. On the surface, what if someone has a passion which is unprofitable? Becoming rich is the way, and motivation to be able to practice it. And going deeper: having 'a passion' doesn't necessary make anyone a better person vs someone who just wants to give his/her kids a better start, and spend the last part of life being able to pay medical bills.

Helicopter rides aren’t that expensive. Uber Copter offers rides starting at like $200.

Also, if you want something safe, you can pay for it. If you don’t want to pay, accept the consequences. Nothing wrong with giving people choices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com