
Mike Ey, Microsoft HoloLens designer, killed in hit and run - rockdiesel
http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/suspected-drunk-driver-court-after-allegedly-causi/nkMdH/
======
namuol
Fuck. I feel shocked ... sick. I don't know what to say.

I went to RIT with Mike. He was a seriously passionate developer and very
clearly destined for great things. Finding out about this here makes me wish I
had stayed in touch. This is unreal, and makes zero sense.

Too many emotions that I don't know what to do with, so I'll end my comment
there. Just hope the rest of his family and friends are doing okay. RIP, Mike.
:(

Edit:

I just want to say a little more about Mike. We were fairly close, but only my
first year or two at RIT when we shared a dorm building and met through mutual
friends.

Mike and I didn't stay in touch when our housing situations changed, but
whenever we ran into each other on campus, we'd catch up, usually talking
about what sort of stuff we'd been working on.

He was a bit like Sherlock Holmes. Socially, he seemed to be operating on
another plane, and was at most in his element when talking about our craft, or
really anything he was passionate about. He was keen to become a master at
everything he tried his hand in, and he was deservedly proud of that.

In hindsight, Mike really was more than a peer or an acquaintance -- I looked
up to him.

~~~
epaladin
Another RITer- one of my friends is quoted in the article- I don't think I
ever knew Mike's name but we were definitely in the same place at the same
time quite frequently. Definitely sad.

~~~
GauntletWizard
I'm in precisely the same boat; I knew the face, not the name, and friends
were quoted in the article. I'm really saddened by the loss. He was far too
young, and clearly on top of his game. It's a shocking reminder of our own
mortality.

------
oflordal
Säd. Coindidentally the same happened to one of the Oculus founders.
[http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/01/oculus-vr-co-founder-
andrew...](http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/01/oculus-vr-co-founder-andrew-scott-
reisse-killed-at-33-the-victim-of-a-hit-and-run/)

~~~
Chevalier
Not that it's any more or less tragic, but I've always been astonished that
Silicon Valley is so car-dependent. We've concentrated the most brilliant
minds in the world in this small area... and then force everyone to pilot two-
ton bullets to pick up groceries?

Not all workers can demand decent living conditions, but you'd think the
competitive draw for workers in Silicon Valley would entice company towns to,
I don't know, add segregated bike lanes so programmers' kids can get to school
safely. Add public parks and dense housing so you can walk down to the corner
coffee store or take your dog for a walk. Ban cars from certain streets to
encourage local commerce and nightlife. SOMETHING.

Google's at least trying to improve Mountain View with their new campus (and
Apple is very much not trying to improve Cupertino). But what the hell. An
international group of wealthy geniuses can't get it together enough to demand
marginally walkable lifestyles?

And people wonder why everyone commutes from San Francisco.

~~~
VLM
This article is being flooded with weird anti-car hate. Yet, my car is
perfectly safe and can only kill someone in a hit and run at 100 MPH if, and
only if, I get drunk first.

Given that I don't drink very much and then only at home (a sixer lasts me
about a season, sometimes half a year) that means my car is incredibly safe
and will almost certainly never kill anyone. Odd how there's no anti-alcohol
hate here on HN, yet its the alcohol doing the actual killing.

If you subtract out deaths due to drunkenness, cars kill less people than
bathtubs. Perhaps we need a war on bathtubs. Because nothing is ever a drunk's
fault.

~~~
icebraining
I agree, it's the drunk's fault. But that's irrelevant if you're trying to
stop people from getting killed, instead of just trying to assign blame. What
matters is what we can do about it, and pushing for a reduction in car usage
is an effective way of reducing vehicular manslaughter.

Being drunk is not the only way to kill someone while driving at 100mph. As
someone who was in a car when the steering wheel simply stopped controlling
the wheels while we were in a road with heavy traffic, which culminated with
it rolling over 270°, I can guarantee you that (nobody got killed, but it was
pure luck).

EDIT: reduced dumb and useless aggressiveness.

~~~
zo1
" _What matters is what we can do about it, and pushing for a reduction in car
usage is an effective way of reducing vehicular manslaughter._ "

Let me play a bit of devil's advocate here. Where are you going to draw the
line? All too often I see people talking about reducing this, preventing that,
etc. However, everyone does so with all sorts of weird convenience and funding
constraints/caveats, effectively reducing the problem to "how far can we take
this before it becomes too inconvenient/expensive for us".

I say, if you want to prevent/fix something, do it. Throw money/laws at the
problem until it goes away or is near-zero. I genuinely used to say that, and
believe in it. These days, with my eventual political beliefs, I hope it gets
taken seriously so we can all realize the futility in it. Like grasping a
balloon in a fist.

~~~
icebraining
I view it in the opposite way - to me, there's nothing weird about stopping
when it becomes too expensive; nor do I see a need to draw a line - each
possible measure has a different line over which the costs are higher than its
benefits.

I don't want to "declare war" on drunk driving. I want to take small and
measurable steps that achieve a sustained y/y reduction in those deaths.

------
codemac
Unfortunate how many humans we have driving cars at various levels of
impairment. It's killing so many people.

Drunk driving in suburban areas is rampant and feels almost inherent without
real public transportation options at last call. I think most of Seattle's
public transit options stop right around midnight.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Cars are pretty safe, but I'm always a little shocked that we don't have
governors built into cars with sane limits. How is it even possible to do
100mph and why should that speed be allowed? Cars should top off at 75.

Not to mention, why are cars dumb machines? If someone is going crazy fast in
an area where there is no safe way to decelerate, then the car should not
allow that speed to be reached. Freeway speeds should not be allowed when
you're not on the freeway.

The self-driving car isn't the solution here. Its too sci-fi, too out there,
and no one can make it work with snow and rain right now. We middle a
practical middle-ware nanny and we need one quick. We need a new Ralph Nader
focused on intelligent safety systems and advocating for them to be law. We'll
never stop drunks, but we might be able to stop drunks from performing fatal
strikes. Its great that they caught the drunk, but that doesn't bring Mike
back to life.

Personally, I dont think we're getting to these self-driving cars without
these kinds of baby steps. Best to start advocating them now, which will give
us public support when fully automated cars are truly here.

~~~
Chevalier
Cars are very UNSAFE, for the record. [1] Self-driving cars will be better...
but autonomous cars are SUCH an intellectually lazy progression from the
status quo that I hope they won't happen.

Rather than autonomous cars, we should be focusing on Taleb's antifragile
solutions like walking and biking. This means the design of dense housing and
walkable streets, and the removal of two-ton bullets that massacre children
every day.

I grew up in Los Angeles, so I'm aware of how alien the concept is of a
walkable city to Californians. It wasn't until I moved to the East Coast and
Europe that I realized other people don't need to drive ten miles to see
friends or pick up dinner.

If HN types don't recognize and question these car-dependent assumptions,
there's no chance the rest of the country will. Nor would most Americans want
to address the question. To accurately price vehicle traffic for real
infrastructure costs (much less negative externalities or pigovian taxes)
would absolutely devastate the value of car-dependent real estate... which is
most of the country.

I guess we'll just continue letting children and geniuses be killed. At best,
self-driving cars will continue this horrible urban planning and somewhat
lower the body count. It's a goddamn shame.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year)

~~~
rinon
Completely agree on your suggestions for urban areas.

However, not everyone wants dense housing... Suburbs exist because people do
not want to be that close to each other. Some people want to own their own
yards/property/houses, have open space, and are willing to trade driving
significantly more (with its associated dangers) for these features. People
are going to create the kind of environment they want to live in, and we
should figure out ways to make that environment better/safer, rather than
dictating that everyone must live in (well-planned) urban environments.

~~~
Chevalier
Of course there's a place for suburbs, and I'm not opposed to the idea of less
dense housing. Such housing can exist in the context of walkable neighborhoods
with public transit, though. I think there's quite a bit of merit to firm city
limits that prevent sprawl and car dependence.

That said... if someone wants to live in exurbia, he should pay an appropriate
amount to access amenities downtown. It's absurd that someone can pay
$1500/month for a studio downtown, but only a few feet from his front door,
anyone can drive a similarly-sized vehicle at hazardous speeds for free.

Driving is essentially free in the US, despite enormous costs in terms of
infrastructure and public space. That needs to change. If car-dependent exurbs
must continue to exist, then we should at least make those exurbs responsible
for their own costs rather than forcing urban residents to have their
neighborhoods destroyed and then pay for the privilege.

~~~
Turing_Machine
"That said... if someone wants to live in exurbia, he should pay an
appropriate amount to access amenities downtown."

Wait: downtowns are dying all across the country, and you want to solve that
problem by charging people more money to go there?

~~~
Chevalier
Downtowns are dying because parasitic exurbs have both removed tax revenue
from the urban core while multiplying their infrastructure/services/health
costs. It's unsurprising that residents flee cities that become dangerous,
dirty highways.

Some of these cities are now beyond repair, not least for the overarching
national trend of capital concentration in Silicon Valley/Silicon Alley, but
these reforms would still help enormously. For example, Bloomberg's plan to
toll bridges into New York City that was vetoed by car-dependent Albany. It's
absolutely ridiculous that exurban commuters are allowed to devastate NYC
every day, for free, because they're too entitled either to live in the city
or even to commute via less destructive trains.

I would really love to hear your explanation why New York City should be
required to spend billions on bridges and roads crushed by automobile traffic
for commuters who don't even pay taxes into the repair fund. Much less why NYC
residents should be forced to give up enormous swaths of precious road real
estate at peril to their health and quality of life.

~~~
Turing_Machine
"I would really love to hear your explanation why New York City should be
required to spend billions on bridges and roads crushed by automobile traffic
for commuters who don't even pay taxes into the repair fund"

They don't. They can stop doing it any time they want.

I don't think the result is going to be what you expect, though, especially
now that no one has to live (or even visit) the city to do most types of
business.

------
chadaustin
I worked with Mike Ey at IMVU for several years. He was the first tech lead
for our 3D engine team, and his contributions to the company are innumerable.
Moreover, I only now see how much he meant to me. He taught me how to solder,
basic electronics, and spun me up on Unity3D. He was always willing to help,
and one of the happiest people I've ever met.

The world dimmed a little this weekend. We'll miss you Mike.

~~~
jamesbirchler
I also worked with Mike at IMVU. Mike was a wonderful person all around, and a
great technologist to boot. I'm proud to have worked with him.

------
cromwellian
Reminds me of Googler Steve Lacey, killed by a road rage driver
([http://www.kirklandreporter.com/news/138605969.html](http://www.kirklandreporter.com/news/138605969.html))

When trying to find this story, I googled "employee killed by driver" and it's
just a non-stop parade of stories of drunks and ragers killing people.

If you cause an accident either drunk or by rage, you should go to jail,
period. The Netherlands has no tolerance for this kind of bullshit. Injure
someone while stoned, 3 years jail time. Kill? 6 years or more.

People obsess about self driving cars killing people, and yes, there will be
accidents. yes, there's going to be a case of a little girl chasing after a
ball into the street who gets run over. Yes, there's going to be cases of a
self driving car running over a pedestrian, or turning head on into traffic.
I'm almost sure of it.

But these incidents probably will be insignificant compared to 30,000+ people
killed per year and even more injured by human drivers. If 100 people lose
their lives to software bugs per year in cars (which will improve over time),
but 10,000 people lose their lives to _human bugs_ , it will be a vast
improvement.

~~~
jimmyslim22
This is where the troublesome nature of humans comes into play. I first want
to say that as someone who works in robotics, I want the automation revolution
to come as much as the next guy. As a matter of fact, you are probably going
to be hard pressed to find a demographic on this site that thinks differently.
However, our world is sometimes driven by the vocal minority and in this case
it will be the luddites that VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE self-driving cars for short
minded purposes.

Growing up in Nebraska and witnessing the reaction to technological influence
there was very eye opening in that you realize that the common man/women
thinks very much with their emotions and not with logic. You can beat them
over the head with facts like this and they will argue for their old ways.
They want to be in control of the situation. They want to have the right to
drive their car themselves and they certainly don't trust a machine to do it
for them. (I guarantee that you will hear arguements like "it's taking away
jobs" and "look at this instance where it malfunctioned") this leaves some
very tricky features that engineers must work into it. Is there a manual
override? Are there regulations on what kind of sensing equipment is on board
or is it left to the private company? What is the acceptable error range for a
car at the end of the day?

I think we will move into a world dominated by self-driving cars and other
tech conviences that make our life easier, but I think it will be slowed down
considerably by those who are resistant to change. I think anything that cuts
down on instances such as this is a good and much needed thing that cannot get
here any faster.

------
pbgodwin
I drove past this accident Saturday morning on my way home from a friends
house. It was fresh... maybe ten minutes since the accident happened. It was
absolutely awful.

And now it looks like we've lost a brilliant co-worker. Absolutely awful. My
thoughts are with his family and loved ones.

------
jbhatab
This is just a tragic. Best wishes to his family and friends.

------
watersb
Awful tragedy.

I fucking hate cars. I really tried to like them, because they are required
for child care in the United States. But I failed.

Haven't driven a car to work since 1997. But I used taxis in 1998. Moved out
to a remote area where I could walk to work in 1999. And my miles-driven-per-
year remained the same as when I lived in the Bay Area.

Damn. America is big, and relatively sparsely populated.

------
Surio
This is so sad. This is the third time I hear of extremely gifted people that
I know of, killed by road accident/hit and run.

Growing up, I used to hear cassettes of Jon Higgins (musician) and was
impressed at his dedication to his craft. Upon asking my father, why we didn't
have any new cassettes of his, I was told he was killed in a road accident..
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_B._Higgins](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_B._Higgins)
!Gutted!

Then, I was exposed to UNIX, and fell in love with it. Loved the man pages,
tried to figure out how the man pages are created, got into the History of
it.... and discovered that the original developer of the roff tool, Joe
Osanna, was also killed by road accident. !Gutted!

Now, gutted again! :(

I sincerely wish that his family and near and dear ones are provided with the
strength to handle this utterly painful situation that they are forced to
face, all of a sudden!

------
filmgirlcw
How awful. My condolences to his family and friends. It's always awful when we
lose such great minds in such senseless, preventable ways.

I'm a firm believer that anyone who gets caught driving under the influence
should lose their license permanently. You drink and drive? You don't get to
drive. Period.

------
JCook4523
Stories like these are so tragic. I'm very optimistic about self driving car
technology, primarily due to it's ability to reduce these types of unnecessary
deaths.

------
itl12
Very sad story. RIP.

How is it that the driver lived (allegedly doing 100) and even managed to run
away from the scene? What vehicle was he in? :/

~~~
zo1
I came here wanting to know the same thing. I'm not exactly clued-up on
accidents and cars, etc. But it seems highly odd that one can just die from
being rear-ended by a car (even if it's going 100)? The only thing I can think
of is that the breaks were on, so his body/head whip lashed forward badly or
something.

Anyone have any other theories about this sad event?

~~~
cowsandmilk
You can see it easily from the story. Ey's car spun around the road into a
concrete wall. Malsch, the drunk driver, had his car stay on the road, just
suffering front end damage from hitting Ey.

In all the videos, Ey's car looks absolutely demolished while Malsch's looks
like just a rough accident.

~~~
zo1
Thanks for the info, didn't notice it earlier!

------
justageek123
Let's not forget the responsibility of the bar that continued to serve the
drunk coward. My friend found him on FB tagged in the bar just a couple of
hours before the accident. His blood alcohol was 3 times the legal limit. I am
told, one would be almost comatose and they let him leave.

~~~
darklajid
The bar isn't responsible.

They don't need to make sure that people don't get drunk. They don't need to
supervise people and ask them where they live and how the intend to get home.

There's zero responsibility from my pov. If he wrecked havoc in the bar,
attacked people or whatnot, then they have a reason to throw him out. They can
always refuse to serve him the xth drink, but that's not responsible, that's
mostly "making sure that people don't vomit all over the place".

The single responsibility for drunk drivers lies with the drunk driver. Not
the bar, the system, society in general or whatever. Cars are not the problem
either. It was one person's act.

(Too harsh? I lost my license for the better part of a year about a decade ago
- for crashing my car on the Autobahn returning drunk from a party. Cannot
recommend that, it was a highly expensive - in monetary terms, at that time -
but luckily otherwise harmless, mightily effective lesson. So when I say that
this person was an idiot I state that from the position of having been that
sort of idiot in the past)

------
josefresco
Random thought... I wonder if the emergency stop systems being implemented in
today's cars would help with situations like this. I'm not sure it could stop
someone _this_ reckless (100+MPH) but certainly it could have slowed the car
before impact.

------
mactitan
Google drive would solve drunk driving problem but a drunk driver deactivation
system could be developed immediately. (I'm sure there would be legal issues
to implement it!. And tech issues: ie if passenger drunk dont deactivate)

------
bovermyer
And this is why humans should not be allowed to drive cars.

Reliable, safe, self-driving cars can't come soon enough.

My deepest condolences to Mike's family and friends. =(

------
varelse
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times, it's enemy action."
\- Auric Goldfinger

------
lawnchair_larry
Did he design the hololens, or was he a designer on the hololens team? Not to
take away from the tragedy, but spinning it as the former when it's the latter
is clickbaity and disrespectful to the deceased.

~~~
sergiotapia
I wanted to know this as well. Here's what I found:
[http://www.businessinsider.com/mike-ey-microsoft-hololens-
de...](http://www.businessinsider.com/mike-ey-microsoft-hololens-designer-and-
engineer-dies-in-hit-and-run-2015-3)

