Lead Developer of Yum Killed In Hit-and-run

An anonymous reader writes "Seth Vidal, a lead developer of Yum, was killed in a hit-and-run accident while riding his bicycle in Durham, NC last night." The Fedora Project posted a statement. Quoting: "Seth was a lead developer of yum and the update repository system, and a contributor to the CentOS project as well as the original Fedora Extras system. He worked tirelessly on the infrastructure for the Fedora Project to make all systems work well and consistently for our contributors around the world. He was a gifted speaker, a brilliant thinker, a clever wit, a humble and genuinely funny person, and a good friend. The Fedora community owes an enormous debt of gratitude to Seth's dedication to Fedora and other free software projects, his commitment to community values, and his passion for excellence in his work. To say he will be missed is an understatement." Update: 07/10 00:24 GMT by U L : Local news reports that the driver turned himself in.

Comments

When you ride at night,

[Spy Handler]

wear white.

Re:When you ride at night,

[CanHasDIY]

blame the victim. i guess you think women in short skirts are asking to be raped?

He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Anonymous Coward]

No amount of high-vis can protect you from stupid drivers. Given that the driver did not stop, I think we can assume that they place no value on the lives of others.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Anonymous Coward]

White doesn't cut it at night.
Wear reflective.

Re:When you ride at night,

[characterZer0]

White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

In many places hit and run carries a lighter penalty than DUI, so often drivers have an incentive to flee. Hit and run should be a felony.

Re:When you ride at night,

[barc0001]

The driver fleeing the scene is a pretty clear indication of whose fault the driver presumed the accident to be. Hint: not the cyclist's.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Culture20]

When you ride at night, wear lights. Unless you're going to the airport.

Re:When you ride at night,

[dan828]

Or he was drunk. Or high. Or had a suspended license. Or a warrant. Or was an "undocumented worker". Or any number of things that would lead the guy to flee the scene, even if he wasn't the at fault party. I mean, my experience tells me that the driver likely was at fault, but we really don't know, and there can be a ton a reasons why someone would take off.

Re:When you ride at night,

[pspahn]

I received Revolights for Christmas last year.

Of course, they won't prevent me from getting hit, but they sure do help. Cars, pedestrians, other cyclists... they all stop when I go by simply because they are looking at my lights because they look pretty fucking cool.

Re:When you ride at night,

[QuadEddie]

He was a black guy with a suspended licence.

Re:When you ride at night,

[DavidJSimpson]

From the article, the accident happened at 9pm. So it probably wasn't dark.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Duhavid]

"And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers."

Try riding a bike for about a year, seriously. You will start to think "what will protect me from blind, stupid car drivers".

"Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident"

Mind made up already? From what I have read, it sounds like the car driver was at fault.
He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved
And then drove off. Could be either at fault. With the hit from behind part, it is hard to seriously argue is was the cyclist at fault.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Charliemopps]

You're misconstruing "death by hit and run" with "hit and run" Most hit and runs are in parking lots and the other drivers inside the store. Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category. It's not that hit and runs are lenient, it's that DUI offenses are treated ridiculously harsh. My state has one of the most lax DUI laws in the country and you still get a $2k fine, lose your license for at least a year and likely will get jail time.

Re:When you ride at night,

[Anonymous Coward]

He was a black guy with a suspended licence.

Citation, you racist ignorant fuck? (note, recind that last part if you actually *supply* a legitimate citation)

http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

Re:When you ride at night,

[MacGyver2210]

Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category.

I'd love to know which ones. In Wisconsin, where I live, I see people FREQUENTLY getting 4th through 8th DUIs, and I can't help but wonder why the cops are so fucking terrible at keeping these people off the streets(or, you know, doing their job at all). I quickly realized that they don't WANT these people off the streets, as they use it as a revenue generator.

"We give you a real hard slap on the wrist, and take your plastic card, and suddenly you can't drive. Oh wait, you don't follow the law, you'll drive anyway(or pay the exorbitant fines and fees to get your 'sort-of' license reinstated). When you break the law again, we can charge you even MORE and let you go AGAIN!"

If the government actually wanted to prevent DUIs, they would adopt Germany's DUI penalty: First offense - ENORMOUS fine, lose your license(which costs thousands of euros to obtain in Germany), vehicle seized and sold, proceeds donated to any victims or a fund for the same. Second offense - Huge fines, and prison. Lots, and lots, of prison.

Re:When you ride at night,

[barc0001]

"Or he was drunk" - His fault and he was breaking the law

"Or high" - His fault and he was breaking the law

"Or had a suspended license" - Indeed he did, and once again, HIS FAULT for being on the road when he shouldn't have been.

"Or a warrant." - So he's breaking the law 24/7 and should have turned himself in to sort it out.

"Or was an 'undocumented worker'" - You mean someone in the country illegally who hasn't got a driver's license? You mean someone breaking the law by driving a motor vehicle without a license? His fault.

"even if he wasn't the at fault party" - These words do not mean what you think they mean. If any of your conditions you listed for fleeing were true (and one was!) then he should NOT have been on the road, and by choosing to drive he deliberately started a chain of events that ended in tragedy. His fault.

Re:When you ride at night,

[peppepz]

And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers.

Actually, it's quite easy, you just have to drive slow enough to be able to brake before hitting anything that is in front of you. That would have avoided most of the accidents I've seen.

Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident.

A no-fault accident is when a biker appears from the side of the road and you can't manage to avoid hitting him. In this case, the biker was hit from behind, so the fault his the driver's, full stop. Moreover, when you have an accident, you don't get to decide whose fault it is. You stay there and help the victim. If you run, you're a criminal, no excuses.

Very short history of yum

[Anonymous Coward]

here.

Thank you

[ssam]

Thank you for all your hard work. You will be missed.

Re:Probably a prank gone wrong.

[CanHasDIY]

I have seen drivers of vehicles in the USA perform an act which looks like a deliberate "nudge" to a random cyclist before driving away at high speed.

If I had an always-on dash-mounted video camera, I would be tempted to post videos of people doing such nonsense.

So sad.

You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.

I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.

There have been so many...

[Irick]

It's sobering just how many of these great contributors to oss and technology in general have passed away these past few years. Mortality is not something I often contemplate at twenty two but I find it constantly popping up in the legacy of this subculture.

I really do wonder if we are predisposed to see death as a problem that needs to be solved, because all I can think of are the tragic losses of minds and icons that could be prevented somehow and how valuable that would be to humanity as a whole.

Seth will be missed and hopefully his work will live on.

Re:There have been so many...

[sideslash]

It's worse than you realize. In fact, 100% of people who work on Open Source Software die.

Hit and Run driver turned himself in.

[Anonymous Coward]

They caught the guy who did this.

http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in.

[barc0001]

Dude was driving with a revoked license. He needs to go to jail since obviously just taking his license away doesn't seem to be all that effective in curbing his poor judgement.

Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in.

[damicatz]

He already has a DWI.

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/calendars.Offense.do?submit=submit&case=3102012061874&court=CR

DWI laws in this state are a joke. And when they finally get banned from driving a car (after half a dozen convictions or so), they are still allowed to go and drive a moped on the road.

Re:This is why...

[scot4875]

If someone on a bike runs a red light or stop sign and they get hit, that's their bad and that's on them; they'll get no sympathy from me.

If you treat someone on a bike like shit because you saw a random biker run a red light or a stop sign once (or twice, or 1000 times, it doesn't matter), that makes you a dick, and that's on you.

--Jeremy

Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents".

[CalRobert]

If you hit somebody and leave them to spend their last gasping breath in a gutter, it is not an "accident". It is manslaughter, or if a prank as described above, cold-hearted murder. I hate, hate, hate the US' auto-centric point of view. Tens of thousands of people per year are killed because of it. It needs to end. I hope I can get permanent residency outside of that cesspool.

Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents".

[wisnoskij]

That is false, it is entirely possible to accidentally perform a hit and run.

Driver turned himself in...

[MrKevvy]

http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

Re:Probably a prank gone wrong.

[0100010001010011]

Which is why you carry one of those emergency hammers designed to shatter tempered glass. It gets their attention. And when asked how I hit them with the hammer I asked how they were within arms reach when the law states there is a minimum 3' passing distance.

Re:This is why...

[Antibozo]

Yea, OK, so if you and your cyclists buddies want to get together and raise the money to pay for dedicated bike paths, I'll support using public land to build them.

However, if you're like many of the d-bags around these parts who want their private bike streets paid for with my road and fuel taxes... You can go piss up a rope.

You know that most cyclists have cars, and drive, too, so they're paying fuel taxes right alongside you, right? But when they're riding their bikes, they're using up a lot less space on the roads, reducing congestion and leaving more room for you to get around. Compared with cars, bikes contribute virtually no wear on roads, and areas paved for bike traffic cost a fraction of what regular rated roads cost, because of the dramatically reduced load requirements. When cyclists get where they're going, they will lock up to a bike rack that fits 20 vehicles in the area of a parking space, leaving more parking for you to put your car in. They're also reducing gasoline demand, which might slightly lower the price you pay at the pump. As a driver, you stand to gain in numerous ways from others' cycling.

And fuel taxes don't cover the cost of the roads, anyway, mainly because they've been essentially stagnant while the cost of fuel increased fivefold. Drivers' use of the roads is heavily subsidized now by general taxation, so you don't get to point at cyclists and say they're the freeloaders.

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending/
http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/do-roads-pay-themselves

Re:additional advice:

[fahrbot-bot]

i will be riding and walking against traffic out of self-preservation, and will continue to advise others to do the same

Sure, do whatever you want, but please don't advise others. What you're doing is dangerous and illegal. Here's what others say:

Is it safer for bicyclists to ride with traffic or to ride against traffic?

Bicyclists should ride with traffic. One of the keys to safe bicycling is to be as predictable and as conspicuous as possible so that motorists always know you are there and can predict what you are going to do. By riding against traffic -- especially on the sidewalk -- you make yourself almost invisible to motorists turning at intersections and driveways who may not be expecting or looking for road users coming from your direction. Indeed, as many as one in four bicycle/motor vehicle collisions involve a rider who is either riding against traffic and/or riding on the sidewalk.

In a lengthy article explaining why riding the wrong way against traffic is dangerous, author Ken Kifer explores the three principle dangers:

• Turning motorists are not looking where wrong-way riders are riding.
• The motorist and bicyclist have limited time and little space in which to react to each others' presence.
• The closing speed of a bicyclist and motorist riding head on into each other is higher than if the bicyclist and motorist were traveling in the same direction.

He also points out that riding with traffic decreases the number of vehicles passing you, and doesn't bring you into conflict with bicyclists who are riding the right way with traffic!

There are many, many others sites with similar information: http://www.capitalbikeshare.com/news/2012/02/24/never-ride-against-traffic or simply Google: bicycle ride "(with|against)" traffic

yeah, the police get right on those cases

[SuperBanana]

You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.

BWHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA. I had someone sideswipe me and then intentionally "brake check" me (looked in his mirror right at me, glaring, and slammed on his brakes, with nothing in front of him, no intersection, etc.) I gave the cops a complete plate and description and they said there was nothing they could do, because I hadn't been injured - even though the driver, in side-swiping me, had caused a "collision" and by leaving, a hit-and-run - and by stopping in the middle of the road, driven recklessly.

I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.

No, "a lot" of cyclists don't have deathwishes nor are they stupid. You just think they do, because they're a minority outgroup - so you exaggerate negative attributes. The vast majority of cyclist crashes are caused by drivers operating recklessly or illegally. And what right-of-way laws would those be, by the way? Let me guess: you think that you have a right of way over someone on a bicycle, right? Yeah, you don't, actually.

you're victim-blaming as well.

[SuperBanana]

He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.

Yes, actually, the poster (we don't know it's a "he"...) is perpetuating victim-blaming of cyclists for their injuries and deaths. It's rampant in the US.

1)The cause is unknown (ie, it's not known that visibility was the problem, so how he was dressed is moot) 2)The onus is not on cyclists to dress in a particular way, the onus is on people with the very nice headlights on the front of a very deadly machine to operate that machine properly and be able to avoid a 6 foot tall, 3 foot wide object in the road traveling in the same direction as them 3)In stories like these, people (especially those who don't cycle) take it as an opportunity to condescendingly lecture those of us who do, about how to ride our bicycles. Seth, for example, was apparently an avid cycling advocate, which means he was damn well aware of how to ride "safely", probably knew the laws better than most drivers, and almost certainly had lights, which means he was plenty "visible."

In almost every story about cyclist injuries and deaths, the comments are hateful, vile, and portray the problem as being everything from cyclists merely being present, to how they behave (despite the fact that drivers are at fault in the vast majority of crashes, as numerous studies have proven), to, yes, how they dress. We're apparently at fault if we're not dressed like psycho day-glo clowns.

Let's take a look at some of the comments on TFA, shall we?

• "they don't belong on the roads."
• "Riding a bicycle at 9pm on a major road is a statistic about to happen. How many people are going to have to die before laws are changed concerning cyclists?"
• "Did the bike have lights? Was the man in night riding "bright" clothes?"
• "If a bicyclist is going to be riding at nights - you need some kind of reflective wear so that the vehicles can better see them - I'm not taking sides, but I've driven on roads at night and have passed bicyclists and could barely see them"
• "the car driver might not have been in the wrong...a bike, at 9pm is close to invisible, especially with glare of oncoming headlights."
• "he should have been wearing reflective clothing too..I didn't see anything in the article about him wearing reflective clothing..."
• "I hate seeing cyclists on the road! roads are too dangerous for bikes, period."

Now do you understand why the comment wasn't appropriate? The comparison to rape victims is quite accurate; rape victims used to be blamed for going out at night, or not having a "friend" (male) with them, to not carrying self-defense devices, to being dressed "like that."

I was just struck by a driver recently. The ER doctor finished up his exam by instructing me to "ride defensively" and "bike carefully." I had been operating legally and prudently, and the driver in a split second cut me off and stopped - blocking the road. There was nothing I could do. I was a victim. And the ER doctor was lecturing me, implying it was my fault for not being "careful" enough.

be more visible to people NOT LOOKING....?

[SuperBanana]

White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

Bright headlights and taillights do not always help. If you ride at night, use dayglo clothing, flags, strobe lights, and pyrotechnics. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

If they're "not paying attention" (aka not looking at the road), please explain to me how "being more visible" will help....

I've been hit in the middle of the day, I've been doored despite having a very bright headlight, and I've been cut off ("right hooked") by someone who just passed me, again in the day. Visibility has nothing to do with it. It's about drivers thinking they have the right of way over us universally, and it's about drivers not looking.

In most studies, the number of crashes vs time has little to do with daylight, and everything to do with rush hour - ie people driving aggressively, and traffic density.

about those taxes

[SuperBanana]

Dear Richard Allen Black,

"my road and fuel taxes"

There's no such thing as a road tax, and fuel taxes don't pay for roads. Not even close, because they haven't been adjusted for fuel efficiency nor for inflation since before you were born. In almost every country, roads are paid for by property and income taxes.

Second, your car (especially if you drive an SUV or pickup) causes wear and tear on the road. My bicycle does not. Your state has one of the highest highway death rates in the country, so while my bicycle doesn't cause property damage, injury and death...your car sure as hell does, and at great cost to others and the state.

Third, you live in Montana, which is in the top ten in terms of states which take the most in federal taxes relative to what the federal government spends on you. You're leeches, by a ratio of 2:1; you pay $4k in taxes and the federal government spends $8k on your stupid, ignorant ass. Those roads you drive on? You didn't pay for them, hick.

Where's my rebate check from you and your road-damaging, federal-tax-leeching "d-bags"?