8 ms·

Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. O

Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Obviously I'm not saying that's the case, but the extremely irrational driving goes fits a theory of paranoid delusions (brought on by any number of mechanisms), just as the hacked car system goes with about to uncover something big.

sage_joch 13y ago
Yeah, we really don't know. But I'm extremely uncomfortable by the fact that foul play is a real possibility. We already know that the federal government is operating largely in secret and without regard to the law (their insistence that are indeed following their own secret set of laws doesn't provide me much solace). We already know that various press organizations have been wiretapped. I feel like I've woken up into a country I no longer recognize. How long will it be before people no longer feel safe expressing opinions online?
- ForrestN 13y ago
  I definitely already feel some sense of pause. I remember reading this article when it came out; does anyone know if there have been any further developments in the case?
- snowwrestler 13y ago
  Foul play is always a possibility, but it takes evidence to make it real. All we have now is a car crash, a reporter working on a story, and an email. There are lots of car crashes, and lots of reporters working on big stories--many on the same stories Hastings was pursuing. We can't rule out foul play but I'm not ready, personally, to rule it in either. There's just not enough there.
  - TechNewb 13y ago
    Is it known what story he was pursuing?
    - LoganCale 13y ago
      The subject of his email was "FBI Investigation, re: NSA". Don't know if the investigation is the same as his big story, however.
      - TechNewb 13y ago
        Wonder if his notes could be found, I imagine they would have been cloud backed.
        dllthomas 13y ago
        "I imagine they would have been cloud backed." Of course they were; that's how the NSA found out.
        TechNewb 13y ago
        @dllthomas "Of course they were; that's how the NSA found out." Right. Yet to our knowledge the NSA does not have delete privileges to the data centers, meaning that copies of his notes most likely still survive on either local or cloud based storage.
        jlgaddis 13y ago
        Depends on whether his e-mail was hosted by Google or not. ;)
        woah 13y ago
        Yet to our knowledge, the NSA doesn't have read access... until they did a few weeks ago.
        sitkack 13y ago
        Ask the NSA for a copy?
        flyinRyan 13y ago
        I wouldn't do that unless you have a really old car with no electronics to drive.
- skwirl 13y ago
  It is a huge leap from the revelations of late and a world where the government goes around killing journalists. When your parents confided to you that Santa Claus wasn't real, you didn't suddenly become adopted too. Chill out and reacquaint with reality.
  - jychang 13y ago
    You completely misread the point. We don't know the truth, if it was foul play or not. Probably not. BUT, it doesn't matter about the size of the jump, yet the fact that it's even a POSSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ... is scary. Plus, it's not as large of a leap as you think, it goes hand in hand. Everyone is familiar with journalists disappearing in countries like Turkey.
    - saalweachter 13y ago
      Yeah, but the thing is, governments -- and individuals within governments -- don't have to be super secret ninjas. They can be heavy handed and get away with it because they've got power and you don't. The US sent helicopters full of Navy Seals into a foreign country, supposedly an ally, without their permission to kill someone, and then went on TV the next day to brag about it. George W Bush threw hundreds of people into a not-very-secret off-shore prison and then tortured them for a few years and no one did a damn thing about it. When Bradley Manning leaked diplomatic cables, we threw him in a prison and tortured him for a year or three, depending on how you count. Governments don't have to come in the night and fake your accidental death. They can come for you in broad daylight and beat you to death in the street and no one will stop them.
      - ekianjo 13y ago
        Are you saying governments don't do anything secret, because they don't have to ? Well, you are surely misguided. Tons of governmental operations are clearly not happening in the open. And it wouldn't be the first time they make an assassination pass for an accident (or suicide, or whatever other "natural" event). Even "democracies" do that all the time.
    - 13y ago
- anigbrowl 13y ago
  the federal government is operating largely in secret having lots of secret activities != operating largely in secret.
- samstave 13y ago
  Did you guys see the 16 page PDF detailing remote auto take-over? Some are speculating that his car was remotely controlled via this method or tampered with such that his breaks failed. If you haven't seen that PDF, ill to find the link.
  - ims 13y ago
    > Some are speculating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
    - samstave 13y ago
      Get over yourself, seriously. I say "some are speculating" because there are a bunch on Reddit, I.e. some people, who I do not know personally, and have handles as opposed to real-names, so I cannot say "Bill, John and Mary speculate" So, as I am not using the weasel word in the way you describe (as if I were to say "a source close to the crash victim") -- the terminology is still valid in common dialogue.
  - tzs 13y ago
    Assassination by remote controlling the target's car is a Wile E. Coyote level plan. It's hard to imagine any remotely competent government group or organized crime group choosing it. Given the nature of his work, there are much easier methods that would be less work to carry out, have much lower risk of failure, and have much lower risk of leaving behind evidence that might raise suspicion or lead back to those responsible.
    - samstave 13y ago
      http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-usenixsec2011.pdf http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-usenixsec2011.pdf Check this out and look at the source as well as take some time to critically think about the technical resources a group like the NSA has vs. the researchers of this paper... You think that "It's hard to imagine any remotely competent government group or organized crime group" choosing it" is an informed position? I would HOPE you are aware of Stucnet, as well as Duqu... Do you recall this: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/201211162848691713.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/20121116284... This was supposedly the work of the USG/Mossad in Iran. If you think that they would use lowly tactics like a magnetic car bomb -- but would be "too competent" to employ remote hijacking of a late model car, then I simply cannot agree with you on this matter.
- CPAhem 13y ago
  The truth is that we'll never know. Maybe in 10 years some whistleblower will come out and admit, but probably not. The way Snowden is being treated you'd have to be crazy to do it now...
- nhebb 13y ago
  > How long will it be before people no longer feel safe expressing opinions online? Since about three months ago: http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/01/197669495/texas-teen-jailed-for-sarcastic-facebook-comment http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/01/197669...
  - flyinRyan 13y ago
    Wow, avoided the airport because of this kind of insanity? We brought it to your house! I remember just a few short months ago, making fun of the British for arresting someone for tweeting...
- Taylorious 13y ago
  Foul play is almost always a possibility if you over analyze things and don't have a lot evidence. If someone randomly kills them self by jumping off a bridge and no one sees it happen, there is no suicide note, or any other signs, then there could have been foul play because there is no evidence to prove or disprove it. For all anyone knows the person was pushed off the bridge by a passer by. The whole NSA story is disturbing but I don't get how it is connected to a journalist dying in a car crash like 30k or so people do every year do in the USA. The NSA violating peoples internet/phone privacy is a far cry from killing journalists. It is baffling that a story where there is so little evidence of foul play has popped up on HN multiple times and has received such wild speculation. I get that there are a lot of people who are very upset at the US government right now (I'm one of them) and that there is very title trust towards the US government (for good reason), but it is crazy that such wild speculation is going on in a community that is supposedly made up of highly educated, intelligent, logical, tech people. 1. Why is it practically impossible to crash this car? Its well engineered, yeah so what? Accidents still happen no matter how good the safety tech is. 2. Why is it impossible for a car to catch fire after it has been in a high speed crash? It is filled with a highly combustible liquid for Christ sake. 3. Why would his car get hacked into and forced to crash? There has to be about a million easier ways to make a death look like an accident. It also doesn't seem like something that could be done at the spur of the moment. If "they" had time to plan all of this out, why wouldn't they kill him some easier, safer, more efficient way? 4. Why are people saying he may have been drugged with something that causes a psychotic episode etc. I mean really WTF, this is straight up crazy conspiracy nonsense. Of all the crazy conclusions to jump to, why is that more likely than him being drunk, having a psychotic breakdown, insomnia, or using drugs voluntarily (I believe he was even a drug addict in the past, lots of addicts fall of the wagon). 5. Why do people automatically assume that he was actually being investigated by some government organization? Don't all we have is his word?
  - smoyer 13y ago
    And suddenly the conspiracy theorists are wondering if Taylorious works for the NSA ;) Your points are well organized and I tend to agree (especially that there would be an easier way to get rid of him), but I don't think you'll stop those that see a conspiracy around every corner. I tend to see our government (today) as a very mismanaged large corporation. There are people over-reaching and those above them are trying to hide the damage and spin the conversation.
- logn 13y ago
  > I feel like I've woken up into a country I no longer recognize. I've seriously thought about moving to New Zealand. Beautiful country, no software patents, universal healthcare, good schools. I think maybe the era of the US being the best place to be (or at least many people thinking that) is over.
  - flyinRyan 13y ago
    I think that era was actually over decades ago. It's just that thanks to the internet, Americans (like me) are beginning to realize it.
wyck 13y ago
This first question that comes to mind is what was he doing driving at 4:30 in the morning. His friends describe him as a "grandma diver" so why was he driving so fast and blowing red lights on a residential street? Did he ever display this type of behaviour before? Another question is.. how does a well made car burst into flames so quickly.
- tcdent 13y ago
  > how does a well made car burst into flames so quickly? I always wonder about this, it's not like a car fire is anything like hollywood makes it out to be.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Cars can catch fire in real life: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=54e_1333912420 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=54e_1333912420 See also: Ryan Dunn's 911, post-tree. Hollywood may exaggerate the rate at which that happens, but not much more.
    - wavefunction 13y ago
      Ryan Dunn was driving at 130mph when he hit that tree. Not a great example for your position...
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        What makes you think his case sets a lower bound on the speed required to start a fire?
        fredoliveira 13y ago
        Well, physics.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
cjambassador392 13y ago
I think given the fact that the US is literally Nazi Germany, it's pretty much assured that the US assassinated him for what he knew. I'm so glad that these kind of pieces are being upvoted here so we can finally stop talking about all that technology bullshit. Upvote on the left if you agree.
- kiba 13y ago
  I think given the fact that the US is literally Nazi Germany Literally is metaphorically literally? I hate it when people abuse language like that, even though usage dictates conventions.
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    Not to mention the US is also not metaphorically Nazi Germany. There's bad shit going on, but to equivocate the current state of the US to the Third Reich demonstrates either a supremely poor understanding of history, or hyperbolic melodrama, or both.
    - marvin 13y ago
      Actually, comparisons to Soviet or Nazi Germany work against their purpose. If the United States turns into a totalitarian state, it will look nothing like the instances of totalitarian regimes we have learned from textbooks. It will take a much more familiar and understandable form, not very different from how things look today. In most totalitarian states, life goes on like it usually does. It's just the power distribution that changes. This should scare people a lot more than it does.
      - cjambassador392 13y ago
        Non-sheeple like us here on reddit and HN see the US for what it is. I wish the sheeple could see it too but they're blinded by the mainstream media. sigh The curse of being an intelligent free-thinker.
    - 13y ago
simonster 13y ago
Or, an even less interesting possibility: Hastings might in fact have been under some kind of investigation; he might have not slept well the prior night; and he might have fallen asleep at the wheel. This is consistent with the facts of the case: the crash happened in the middle of the night, just after Hastings sped through a red light.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  I'm not trying to suggest foul play by refuting this, but nobody falls asleep at the wheel when driving that fast, no matter how poorly you slept previously. The adrenaline won't let you.
  - simonster 13y ago
    Maybe no one falls asleep while driving that fast, but Google suggests that people can drive pretty fast once they fall asleep: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/sources-lt-gov-murray-asleep-at-wheel-no-seat-belt-speeding-before-crash/ http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/sources-lt-gov-murray-... http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/09/driver_falls_asleep_at_wheel_n.html http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2... http://sandra.visionsmartnews.com/randolph-county-nc-school-bus-driver-crashes_3346.html http://sandra.visionsmartnews.com/randolph-county-nc-school-...
unclebucknasty 13y ago
I don't see why your baseless conjecture about nervous breakdowns and substance abuse should be any more credible than the cause implied by this post. I have seen a lot of people coming up with such alternative explanations, which actually go a long way to avoid a more plausible (if less comfortable) conclusion. Also, I have seen multiple references to some paranoia that Mr. Hastings supposedly had. When I read his email, I see anything but paranoia. He seems very matter-of-fact and even jokes about the investigation. Also, here is a man who had already broken a massive story about a powerful figure and who was in the business of going after such massive stories. Sudden bouts of paranoia wouldn't seem consistent or productive in his line of work. I take exception to that word because it's dismissive. It seeks to paint him as somehow irrational or the cause of his own demise, while simultaneously waiving the notion that there could be outside involvement. It asserts that of course every element of the government is always good in every situation, such that any concerns to the contrary must be paranoia. It is a very insidious use of language. And beyond that, it just makes no sense.
- corresation 13y ago
  It's quite remarkable how thoroughly you have tried to refute my simple statement of a possible alternate scenario, while simultaneously propping up the alternative (and just as baseless) theory, loading your post with a delightful collection of emotive words. We're all mostly adults here. We can rationally discuss that there are many possible scenarios. This is not and will hopefully never be a site where people who try to create a reality in their own perception dominate.
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    You're talking in circles, and in your first paragraph literally just repeated back to me what I'd written about your post. In any case, we have already had many people attack theories of government involvement based on a lack of evidence. Yet, many posit theories with less evidence (such as yours). So, I merely asked why such theories should be any more credible. That is why it doesn't work for you to merely repeat my words back to me. In your second paragraph you opine about us all being adults, capable of rational discussion, yet you made no substantive contribution to that discussion. You just kind of made the observation that this is a great place to do it. If one were so inclined. I guess. Then, you go on to lament about some imaginary future date wherein people use the site to create their own realities or something. What is all this meta-talk? If you want the site to be about discussion of various ideas, then discuss yours! Make your counter-point and defend your position vs. whining about someone disagreeing with you. Do you really not see the irony in passing on opportunities to make your point, and instead using them to express your worry that someday you won't be able to make your point? Good grief. As it is, your entire post was a NOOP.
guelo 13y ago
Yea, having pure conspiracy theories as the top headline on HN is a little embarrassing.
natmaster 13y ago
Unless there is evidence that he has a history with drug abuse, it seems significantly more likely the government was involved in this.
- JshWright 13y ago
  Significantly more likely? I'd like to see _any_ evidence you have that this was anything other than a tragic accident before I'd be willing to consider it even 'a little bit likely'. You have a very long way to go before you can claim 'significantly more likely'.
_pmf_ 13y ago
> Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Ah, but that spin is highly unlikely to generate buzz among moronic internet detectives, and therefore no responsible journalist will deal with such a trite story.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >Ah, but that spin is highly unlikely to generate buzz among moronic internet detectives, and therefore no responsible journalist will deal with such a trite story. On the contrary. Every "respected" news outlet will play this story. After all, it's the place where this happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird (and still goes on, of course).
PavlovsCat 13y ago
What in the email seemed "paranoid" to you? may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues. "Obviously I'm not saying that's the case," Even saying it's likely takes sheer powers of rationalization I can't even fathom. And bringing up just that is what it is. This is like saying "no offense, but" and then saying something offensive.
- corresation 13y ago
  His email hinted at uncovering a grand plot. Lots of people who have mental issues think they've uncovered grand plots. Even saying it's likely I didn't say it was likely, I said it was possible (given that the outright acceptance of incredibly conspiracy theories are by far the most commonly discussed possibility). The difference is profound. But really I think there are some people who seriously flunked basic probabilities. When considering the possibility that he a) was assassinated by rogue government agents who apparently both hacked his car and improvised explosives, or b) who had personal issues that led to irrational behavior, you are seriously saying that the former is more probable? Give me a break -- that is a seriously broken mental model. Further the legend of this reporter has exploded into something completely detached from reality. His legacy is that he wrote an article for Rolling Stone magazine where a shooting-from-the-hip general who was a loudmouthed braggart (almost certainly because he was talking to a Rolling Stone reporter and wanted to be cool) got taken down for it. If you read the narrative on here, this reporter went deep in the NSA and hacked the special mainframe.
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    Why don't you enlighten us all as to the workings of "basic probabilities", since you have clearly applied them in arriving at your conclusions. Perhaps you can start by identifying all of the variables that you considered in assessing the probability of each scenario, then move on to providing us with the statistical probability that you calculated for each of those variables.
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    His email hinted at uncovering a grand plot. Lots of people who have mental issues think they've uncovered grand plots. In other words, claiming to have uncovered a plot is a sign for a mental health issue? Just like being angry is a sign of rabies, huh? Before you dive into probabilities, check out some logic, I hear it helps. And maybe history, since you seem to think a "plot" is something like an elf or pink elephants. are seriously saying that the former is more probable Nope, that's the beauty of it, I'm not even speculating either way. I am dealing with your comment only. When I read that email, I don't see any signs of madness. To the contrary, that bit about legal advice seems a bit too coolheaded for even drug use.
coldtea 13y ago
>Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Something very plausible and easy to think -- even in cases where it is not the case. Which reminds me: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137363/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137363/ He was a seasoned journalist. Working on a very dangerous case (as he has done in the past, annoying many). He might have feared and feel intimidated -- and that might have led to erratic driving and crash. But he sure knew when and if the FBI talked to his friends and colleagues. And it's not like it's the first time a journalist is crashed (either literally or figuratively) for his work. Gary Webb comes to mind. Ruben Salazar too. And those were more innocent times.

sage_joch 13y ago

Yeah, we really don't know. But I'm extremely uncomfortable by the fact that foul play is a real possibility. We already know that the federal government is operating largely in secret and without regard to the law (their insistence that are indeed following their own secret set of laws doesn't provide me much solace). We already know that various press organizations have been wiretapped. I feel like I've woken up into a country I no longer recognize. How long will it be before people no longer feel safe expressing opinions online?

ForrestN 13y ago
I definitely already feel some sense of pause. I remember reading this article when it came out; does anyone know if there have been any further developments in the case?
snowwrestler 13y ago
Foul play is always a possibility, but it takes evidence to make it real. All we have now is a car crash, a reporter working on a story, and an email. There are lots of car crashes, and lots of reporters working on big stories--many on the same stories Hastings was pursuing. We can't rule out foul play but I'm not ready, personally, to rule it in either. There's just not enough there.
- TechNewb 13y ago
  Is it known what story he was pursuing?
  - LoganCale 13y ago
    The subject of his email was "FBI Investigation, re: NSA". Don't know if the investigation is the same as his big story, however.
    - TechNewb 13y ago
      Wonder if his notes could be found, I imagine they would have been cloud backed.
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        "I imagine they would have been cloud backed." Of course they were; that's how the NSA found out.
      - TechNewb 13y ago
        @dllthomas "Of course they were; that's how the NSA found out." Right. Yet to our knowledge the NSA does not have delete privileges to the data centers, meaning that copies of his notes most likely still survive on either local or cloud based storage.
        jlgaddis 13y ago
        Depends on whether his e-mail was hosted by Google or not. ;)
        woah 13y ago
        Yet to our knowledge, the NSA doesn't have read access... until they did a few weeks ago.
      - sitkack 13y ago
        Ask the NSA for a copy?
        flyinRyan 13y ago
        I wouldn't do that unless you have a really old car with no electronics to drive.
skwirl 13y ago
It is a huge leap from the revelations of late and a world where the government goes around killing journalists. When your parents confided to you that Santa Claus wasn't real, you didn't suddenly become adopted too. Chill out and reacquaint with reality.
- jychang 13y ago
  You completely misread the point. We don't know the truth, if it was foul play or not. Probably not. BUT, it doesn't matter about the size of the jump, yet the fact that it's even a POSSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ... is scary. Plus, it's not as large of a leap as you think, it goes hand in hand. Everyone is familiar with journalists disappearing in countries like Turkey.
  - saalweachter 13y ago
    Yeah, but the thing is, governments -- and individuals within governments -- don't have to be super secret ninjas. They can be heavy handed and get away with it because they've got power and you don't. The US sent helicopters full of Navy Seals into a foreign country, supposedly an ally, without their permission to kill someone, and then went on TV the next day to brag about it. George W Bush threw hundreds of people into a not-very-secret off-shore prison and then tortured them for a few years and no one did a damn thing about it. When Bradley Manning leaked diplomatic cables, we threw him in a prison and tortured him for a year or three, depending on how you count. Governments don't have to come in the night and fake your accidental death. They can come for you in broad daylight and beat you to death in the street and no one will stop them.
    - ekianjo 13y ago
      Are you saying governments don't do anything secret, because they don't have to ? Well, you are surely misguided. Tons of governmental operations are clearly not happening in the open. And it wouldn't be the first time they make an assassination pass for an accident (or suicide, or whatever other "natural" event). Even "democracies" do that all the time.
  - 13y ago
anigbrowl 13y ago
the federal government is operating largely in secret having lots of secret activities != operating largely in secret.
samstave 13y ago
Did you guys see the 16 page PDF detailing remote auto take-over? Some are speculating that his car was remotely controlled via this method or tampered with such that his breaks failed. If you haven't seen that PDF, ill to find the link.
- ims 13y ago
  > Some are speculating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
  - samstave 13y ago
    Get over yourself, seriously. I say "some are speculating" because there are a bunch on Reddit, I.e. some people, who I do not know personally, and have handles as opposed to real-names, so I cannot say "Bill, John and Mary speculate" So, as I am not using the weasel word in the way you describe (as if I were to say "a source close to the crash victim") -- the terminology is still valid in common dialogue.
- tzs 13y ago
  Assassination by remote controlling the target's car is a Wile E. Coyote level plan. It's hard to imagine any remotely competent government group or organized crime group choosing it. Given the nature of his work, there are much easier methods that would be less work to carry out, have much lower risk of failure, and have much lower risk of leaving behind evidence that might raise suspicion or lead back to those responsible.
  - samstave 13y ago
    http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-usenixsec2011.pdf http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-usenixsec2011.pdf Check this out and look at the source as well as take some time to critically think about the technical resources a group like the NSA has vs. the researchers of this paper... You think that "It's hard to imagine any remotely competent government group or organized crime group" choosing it" is an informed position? I would HOPE you are aware of Stucnet, as well as Duqu... Do you recall this: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/201211162848691713.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/20121116284... This was supposedly the work of the USG/Mossad in Iran. If you think that they would use lowly tactics like a magnetic car bomb -- but would be "too competent" to employ remote hijacking of a late model car, then I simply cannot agree with you on this matter.
CPAhem 13y ago
The truth is that we'll never know. Maybe in 10 years some whistleblower will come out and admit, but probably not. The way Snowden is being treated you'd have to be crazy to do it now...
nhebb 13y ago
> How long will it be before people no longer feel safe expressing opinions online? Since about three months ago: http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/01/197669495/texas-teen-jailed-for-sarcastic-facebook-comment http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/01/197669...
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  Wow, avoided the airport because of this kind of insanity? We brought it to your house! I remember just a few short months ago, making fun of the British for arresting someone for tweeting...
Taylorious 13y ago
Foul play is almost always a possibility if you over analyze things and don't have a lot evidence. If someone randomly kills them self by jumping off a bridge and no one sees it happen, there is no suicide note, or any other signs, then there could have been foul play because there is no evidence to prove or disprove it. For all anyone knows the person was pushed off the bridge by a passer by. The whole NSA story is disturbing but I don't get how it is connected to a journalist dying in a car crash like 30k or so people do every year do in the USA. The NSA violating peoples internet/phone privacy is a far cry from killing journalists. It is baffling that a story where there is so little evidence of foul play has popped up on HN multiple times and has received such wild speculation. I get that there are a lot of people who are very upset at the US government right now (I'm one of them) and that there is very title trust towards the US government (for good reason), but it is crazy that such wild speculation is going on in a community that is supposedly made up of highly educated, intelligent, logical, tech people. 1. Why is it practically impossible to crash this car? Its well engineered, yeah so what? Accidents still happen no matter how good the safety tech is. 2. Why is it impossible for a car to catch fire after it has been in a high speed crash? It is filled with a highly combustible liquid for Christ sake. 3. Why would his car get hacked into and forced to crash? There has to be about a million easier ways to make a death look like an accident. It also doesn't seem like something that could be done at the spur of the moment. If "they" had time to plan all of this out, why wouldn't they kill him some easier, safer, more efficient way? 4. Why are people saying he may have been drugged with something that causes a psychotic episode etc. I mean really WTF, this is straight up crazy conspiracy nonsense. Of all the crazy conclusions to jump to, why is that more likely than him being drunk, having a psychotic breakdown, insomnia, or using drugs voluntarily (I believe he was even a drug addict in the past, lots of addicts fall of the wagon). 5. Why do people automatically assume that he was actually being investigated by some government organization? Don't all we have is his word?
- smoyer 13y ago
  And suddenly the conspiracy theorists are wondering if Taylorious works for the NSA ;) Your points are well organized and I tend to agree (especially that there would be an easier way to get rid of him), but I don't think you'll stop those that see a conspiracy around every corner. I tend to see our government (today) as a very mismanaged large corporation. There are people over-reaching and those above them are trying to hide the damage and spin the conversation.
logn 13y ago
> I feel like I've woken up into a country I no longer recognize. I've seriously thought about moving to New Zealand. Beautiful country, no software patents, universal healthcare, good schools. I think maybe the era of the US being the best place to be (or at least many people thinking that) is over.
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  I think that era was actually over decades ago. It's just that thanks to the internet, Americans (like me) are beginning to realize it.

wyck 13y ago

This first question that comes to mind is what was he doing driving at 4:30 in the morning. His friends describe him as a "grandma diver" so why was he driving so fast and blowing red lights on a residential street? Did he ever display this type of behaviour before? Another question is.. how does a well made car burst into flames so quickly.

tcdent 13y ago
> how does a well made car burst into flames so quickly? I always wonder about this, it's not like a car fire is anything like hollywood makes it out to be.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Cars can catch fire in real life: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=54e_1333912420 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=54e_1333912420 See also: Ryan Dunn's 911, post-tree. Hollywood may exaggerate the rate at which that happens, but not much more.
  - wavefunction 13y ago
    Ryan Dunn was driving at 130mph when he hit that tree. Not a great example for your position...
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      What makes you think his case sets a lower bound on the speed required to start a fire?
      - fredoliveira 13y ago
        Well, physics.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

cjambassador392 13y ago

I think given the fact that the US is literally Nazi Germany, it's pretty much assured that the US assassinated him for what he knew. I'm so glad that these kind of pieces are being upvoted here so we can finally stop talking about all that technology bullshit. Upvote on the left if you agree.

kiba 13y ago
I think given the fact that the US is literally Nazi Germany Literally is metaphorically literally? I hate it when people abuse language like that, even though usage dictates conventions.
- potatolicious 13y ago
  Not to mention the US is also not metaphorically Nazi Germany. There's bad shit going on, but to equivocate the current state of the US to the Third Reich demonstrates either a supremely poor understanding of history, or hyperbolic melodrama, or both.
  - marvin 13y ago
    Actually, comparisons to Soviet or Nazi Germany work against their purpose. If the United States turns into a totalitarian state, it will look nothing like the instances of totalitarian regimes we have learned from textbooks. It will take a much more familiar and understandable form, not very different from how things look today. In most totalitarian states, life goes on like it usually does. It's just the power distribution that changes. This should scare people a lot more than it does.
    - cjambassador392 13y ago
      Non-sheeple like us here on reddit and HN see the US for what it is. I wish the sheeple could see it too but they're blinded by the mainstream media. sigh The curse of being an intelligent free-thinker.
  - 13y ago

simonster 13y ago

Or, an even less interesting possibility: Hastings might in fact have been under some kind of investigation; he might have not slept well the prior night; and he might have fallen asleep at the wheel. This is consistent with the facts of the case: the crash happened in the middle of the night, just after Hastings sped through a red light.

lawnchair_larry 13y ago
I'm not trying to suggest foul play by refuting this, but nobody falls asleep at the wheel when driving that fast, no matter how poorly you slept previously. The adrenaline won't let you.
- simonster 13y ago
  Maybe no one falls asleep while driving that fast, but Google suggests that people can drive pretty fast once they fall asleep: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/sources-lt-gov-murray-asleep-at-wheel-no-seat-belt-speeding-before-crash/ http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/sources-lt-gov-murray-... http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/09/driver_falls_asleep_at_wheel_n.html http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2... http://sandra.visionsmartnews.com/randolph-county-nc-school-bus-driver-crashes_3346.html http://sandra.visionsmartnews.com/randolph-county-nc-school-...

unclebucknasty 13y ago

I don't see why your baseless conjecture about nervous breakdowns and substance abuse should be any more credible than the cause implied by this post. I have seen a lot of people coming up with such alternative explanations, which actually go a long way to avoid a more plausible (if less comfortable) conclusion. Also, I have seen multiple references to some paranoia that Mr. Hastings supposedly had. When I read his email, I see anything but paranoia. He seems very matter-of-fact and even jokes about the investigation. Also, here is a man who had already broken a massive story about a powerful figure and who was in the business of going after such massive stories. Sudden bouts of paranoia wouldn't seem consistent or productive in his line of work. I take exception to that word because it's dismissive. It seeks to paint him as somehow irrational or the cause of his own demise, while simultaneously waiving the notion that there could be outside involvement. It asserts that of course every element of the government is always good in every situation, such that any concerns to the contrary must be paranoia. It is a very insidious use of language. And beyond that, it just makes no sense.

corresation 13y ago
It's quite remarkable how thoroughly you have tried to refute my simple statement of a possible alternate scenario, while simultaneously propping up the alternative (and just as baseless) theory, loading your post with a delightful collection of emotive words. We're all mostly adults here. We can rationally discuss that there are many possible scenarios. This is not and will hopefully never be a site where people who try to create a reality in their own perception dominate.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  You're talking in circles, and in your first paragraph literally just repeated back to me what I'd written about your post. In any case, we have already had many people attack theories of government involvement based on a lack of evidence. Yet, many posit theories with less evidence (such as yours). So, I merely asked why such theories should be any more credible. That is why it doesn't work for you to merely repeat my words back to me. In your second paragraph you opine about us all being adults, capable of rational discussion, yet you made no substantive contribution to that discussion. You just kind of made the observation that this is a great place to do it. If one were so inclined. I guess. Then, you go on to lament about some imaginary future date wherein people use the site to create their own realities or something. What is all this meta-talk? If you want the site to be about discussion of various ideas, then discuss yours! Make your counter-point and defend your position vs. whining about someone disagreeing with you. Do you really not see the irony in passing on opportunities to make your point, and instead using them to express your worry that someday you won't be able to make your point? Good grief. As it is, your entire post was a NOOP.

guelo 13y ago

Yea, having pure conspiracy theories as the top headline on HN is a little embarrassing.

natmaster 13y ago

Unless there is evidence that he has a history with drug abuse, it seems significantly more likely the government was involved in this.

JshWright 13y ago
Significantly more likely? I'd like to see _any_ evidence you have that this was anything other than a tragic accident before I'd be willing to consider it even 'a little bit likely'. You have a very long way to go before you can claim 'significantly more likely'.

_pmf_ 13y ago

> Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Ah, but that spin is highly unlikely to generate buzz among moronic internet detectives, and therefore no responsible journalist will deal with such a trite story.

coldtea 13y ago
>Ah, but that spin is highly unlikely to generate buzz among moronic internet detectives, and therefore no responsible journalist will deal with such a trite story. On the contrary. Every "respected" news outlet will play this story. After all, it's the place where this happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird (and still goes on, of course).

PavlovsCat 13y ago

What in the email seemed "paranoid" to you? may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues. "Obviously I'm not saying that's the case," Even saying it's likely takes sheer powers of rationalization I can't even fathom. And bringing up just that is what it is. This is like saying "no offense, but" and then saying something offensive.

corresation 13y ago
His email hinted at uncovering a grand plot. Lots of people who have mental issues think they've uncovered grand plots. Even saying it's likely I didn't say it was likely, I said it was possible (given that the outright acceptance of incredibly conspiracy theories are by far the most commonly discussed possibility). The difference is profound. But really I think there are some people who seriously flunked basic probabilities. When considering the possibility that he a) was assassinated by rogue government agents who apparently both hacked his car and improvised explosives, or b) who had personal issues that led to irrational behavior, you are seriously saying that the former is more probable? Give me a break -- that is a seriously broken mental model. Further the legend of this reporter has exploded into something completely detached from reality. His legacy is that he wrote an article for Rolling Stone magazine where a shooting-from-the-hip general who was a loudmouthed braggart (almost certainly because he was talking to a Rolling Stone reporter and wanted to be cool) got taken down for it. If you read the narrative on here, this reporter went deep in the NSA and hacked the special mainframe.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  Why don't you enlighten us all as to the workings of "basic probabilities", since you have clearly applied them in arriving at your conclusions. Perhaps you can start by identifying all of the variables that you considered in assessing the probability of each scenario, then move on to providing us with the statistical probability that you calculated for each of those variables.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  His email hinted at uncovering a grand plot. Lots of people who have mental issues think they've uncovered grand plots. In other words, claiming to have uncovered a plot is a sign for a mental health issue? Just like being angry is a sign of rabies, huh? Before you dive into probabilities, check out some logic, I hear it helps. And maybe history, since you seem to think a "plot" is something like an elf or pink elephants. are seriously saying that the former is more probable Nope, that's the beauty of it, I'm not even speculating either way. I am dealing with your comment only. When I read that email, I don't see any signs of madness. To the contrary, that bit about legal advice seems a bit too coolheaded for even drug use.

coldtea 13y ago

>Another possibility is that he had a nervous breakdown or substance abuse episode, leading to both the paranoid emails and the irrational vehicle operations. Something very plausible and easy to think -- even in cases where it is not the case. Which reminds me: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137363/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137363/ He was a seasoned journalist. Working on a very dangerous case (as he has done in the past, annoying many). He might have feared and feel intimidated -- and that might have led to erratic driving and crash. But he sure knew when and if the FBI talked to his friends and colleagues. And it's not like it's the first time a journalist is crashed (either literally or figuratively) for his work. Gary Webb comes to mind. Ruben Salazar too. And those were more innocent times.