The sub went missing while carrying five people to the wreckage of the Titanic.

  • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Since I heard about this whole fiasco I’m more and more dumbfounded.

    There was this guy, who invented a way to dive for cheap (he listens to the carbon, and if there is a suspicious sound then he quickly comes back to the surface), complaining about the regulations which were holding submarines back. He fired the whistleblower who made reports about the danger of the equipment. He was fired and escorted outside.

    Make him a meme, let’s call him the “I told you so” guy. Surely he will be invited in TV shows about this whole affair.

    The equipment, a game console controller? Seriously? Gaming equipment is simple: It’s about 3% return policy. Depends on the brand. The people who swear that game controllers are safe are among the 97% who never had a return. They are the people who answers “mine works” on a forum when someone ask why his controller failed. If your game controller is broken, the service is : we send you a new one under 48 hours.

    --> This service policy doesn’t work at 3800m under the water, folks! This is not the right equipment. What kind of person bets the life of 4 people on gaming equipment?? We all know why he did it, because he hates regulations and he hates paying a premium on redundant equipment. He is in for the money, nothing else. So let’s cut the costs on the hardware, let’s not listen to anyone and let’s not purchase the product of the engineers who designed equipment specially with these constraints in mind.

    From time to time there is always a guy who pops-up and believes that regulations are made by people with too much free time in their hands.

    • 1bluepixel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The game controller thing gets meme’d to death, but I don’t think people focus on the right thing.

      Xbox controllers are also used by the US Navy, among other branches of the military.

      These are GOOD pieces of engineering, and they’re tested by millions of users under pretty strenuous conditions. However, the controller the Oceangate was using was some shitty-ass third-party controller that you can get for peanuts off Amazon.

      THAT, IMO, is the issue that this piece of equipment illustrates. A solid Xbox Series S controller is $60 on Amazon, and you’re telling me you had to go for cheaper?

      • hypelightfly@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The military uses them for autonomous vehicles. There is no risk of loss of life involved if they fail. They also aren’t the only control mechanism.

      • Phanatik@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think the fact that the controller was wireless gets highlighted enough. Bluetooth devices have a hard time working above sea level and you’re expecting it to work 3800m below the surface. Delusional.

        • pjoter@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          BT devices got problems only when water is in between anetna1 and antena2. It does not matter at what altitude the devices are, just what is inbetween them.

            • FlowVoid@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you want to command something in the water, you run a wire from that something to a receiver in the cabin.

              • GizmoLion@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Right, exactly. Or for a “sub” that only holds 5 people… maybe just spend the 10 cents and wire it lol.

                • FlowVoid@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, the sub had reached Titanic several times, right?

                  So even without the design documents, we know it was previously capable of operating at depth.

                  Which we means we know the hull wasn’t made of cotton candy, we know it wasn’t propelled under water by an internal combustion engine, and we know it wasn’t controlled by a device that stops working in water.

            • GizmoLion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well yes, if they use something in a way specifically contraindicated by the nature of the technology then that’s problematic.
              Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

              • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

                Don’t put on me your burden of proof.

                Well yes, if they use something in a way specifically contraindicated by the nature of the technology then that’s problematic.

                Well, turns out they did. So now that we have established that they don’t follow protocol, are you going to show us their design or are you going to reddit your way out of this conversation?

                • GizmoLion@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Source that they did? I’ve seen nothing to support that to date.

                  or are you going to reddit your way out of this conversation?
                  Wtf? Was that an attempt at condescension?

                  • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Source that they did? I’ve seen nothing to support that to date.

                    That’s exactly my point, no one here has any source about the design. Why don’t YOU ask the people above about THEIR source?

                    Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

                    Don’t act surprised when I answer you the same way you answer me. Now either you bring some source to support the question that was made by someone above you or I’m done. I’m not your source magic machine.

                    The person who started this chain of conversation is gone btw. I don’t know the point you are trying to make.