7 ms·

Background: I used to work on these UUVs. When CNN says "oceanographic research", what they actually mean is building a sonar ray caustics model of the environ

Background: I used to work on these UUVs. When CNN says "oceanographic research", what they actually mean is building a sonar ray caustics model of the environment, because sound bends just like light does when the medium transmission speed changes, and the speed of sound in water changes noticably with depth,salinity,temperature. When CNN says "unclear motivation", what they mean is that the motivation is actually pretty clear. China doesn't like that the US is building underwater surveillance infrastructure in their backyard.

nullnilvoid 10y ago
It is very clear that the US is trying to spy on China. I don't blame China for taking the drones. If Russia sends drones to Hawaii, the US will take them too.
- MrZongle2 10y ago
  The drone was operating in international waters. How, then, is China justified in taking it? Isn't that simply theft? It would have been another thing entirely if the drone were operating within Chinese territory.
  - roywiggins 10y ago
    In international waters? I'd call it piracy.
    - Brockenstein 10y ago
      And pirates are pretty cool...
    - Brockenstein 10y ago
      And pirates are pretty cool...
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      It can only be piracy if done for private ends. Done on behalf of a government, it's simply an act of war.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - MrZongle2 10y ago
    Judging by the voting, I can only assume that at least a few HN users side with the Chinese thieves. And are incapable of posting a coherent rebuttal. Sounds about right.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    As is often the case in international politics, the justification is "well, what are you going to do about it, then?"
- hang 10y ago
  and yeah they don't do that!
  - jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
    You are mistaken. Russia maintains survey vessels as well and regularly patrols just outside the US's exclusive economic zone.
    - forgotmysn 10y ago
      Exactly. And we respect their right to hang out there because it's international waters.
- forgotmysn 10y ago
  I don't think that's clear at all. This drone was in International waters, not Chinese waters, and it sounds like this device was not capturing any actionable intelligence but data on how sound travels through water.
  - sleepingeights 10y ago
    Well, they needed both drones to locate the source of any sounds detected in the water. With only one drone, their tests can determine what sounds were made (and maybe some general vicinity), but not as accurately from where. The Chinese already surprised a US carrier fleet by deploying a submarine fleet that "ambushed" a carrier when one of their subs surfaced in kill range to the carrier, undetected.
anigbrowl 10y ago
The fact that this has military applications as well as scientific/commercial ones doesn't bother me. They were firmly in international rather than disputed waters, I'm pretty sure other countries eyeball our ocean shelf too and it doesn't bother me either. To be honest I don't think China cares all that much either because they're used to the US Navy sailing about as a reminder of our treaties with various other SE Asian countries. They're veen assertive about their territorial claims with the nine-dash line, the building of artificial islands (reportedly now weaponized), and rejecting the decision of the international maritime court recently. Overall I'd characterize relations between the Chinese government and the Obama administration as cool but respectful. I don't know what's happening with the incoming administration and don't want to make a political argument here, but I do think that publicizing the fact of the conversation between Trump and the Taiwanese President, along with the public questioning of the One China policy, probably seems like a huge loss of face for Beijing. China doesn't mind the US having relations, even friendship, with Taiwan - through private channels. Public recognition of the Taiwanese government as a sovereign entity by the US is insulting though - much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC. Edit: great username btw
- hatchback176 10y ago
  They didn't roll out the red carpet for Obama, you're being stupid.
- sweetjesus 10y ago
  > is insulting much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC speaking somewhat loosely, actually there is no "much as if" in this sense. The Chinese have a "face saving is the most important thing" culture, and the US does not. Think of it more like the tribal regions of the -stans: China is metaphorically ready to do some honor killing over this in a way we can't grok. Doesn't mean we should acquiesce of course. I'd perhaps make the analogy that everybody in the Chinese government is as thin skinned as Trump. (I'm exaggerating to make analogies here, no need to jump all over me, of course it's more nuanced.) Meanwhile, our neighboring Mexican politicians publically pour scorn on the US all the time and it doesn't particularly affect our relations (not sure if Trump can take it tho) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept) In any case, it would not actually bother the US all that much if China talked to Hawaii, nor does it bother US that China talks to the Philippines; it would be to our benefit if China and the Philippines resolved their differences mutually, and the same with Taiwan; it does bother US that the Philippines would make short-sighted unwise bargains inasmuch as we get the sense that we will be involved in cleaning up the mess later, and inasmuch as it reinforces China's belief that they should throw their weight around more WRT the Biển Đông (the East Sea, off the coast of Vietnam;)
hang 10y ago
My government just did the right thing.
- forgotmysn 10y ago
  If this had occurred within Chinese waters, I might be inclined to agree with you. However, this occurred in International waters, and your government had no right to steal the vehicle.
  - whybroke 10y ago
    Contrary to international opinion, China believes the South China Sea is in territory owing to an 1940s document containing an '11 dash line' So in the legal opinion of all the world minus China it is theft. In the legal opinion of China it is not. Unfortunately this subtly can not be expressed in a 140 char tweet so the situation deteriorates weekly. (EDIT: beautiful details by jwtadvice here ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13195427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13195427
    - forgotmysn 10y ago
      The situation deteriorates because China refuses to acknowledge international law, not because their bull shit excuses not to don't fit in a tweet.
      - fjdlwlv 10y ago
        International law isn't law if it isn't acknowledged.
      - whybroke 10y ago
        Unfortunately being right is of small consultation if the situation is plunged into economic, diplomatic and military disaster by an ill-informed tweeting leader.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  Perhaps, but without providing reasons for your answer it's kind of meaningless.
bpodgursky 10y ago
Welp. For a while I thought HN was too low profile to fall to the astroturfers. I guess all good things end.
- whybroke 10y ago
  This is actually a very serious problem. Not necessarily astroturfing but high quality topics are easily swept from the front page or the replies turn into an endless slop of loony-spam by people who's ideology is threatened.
vtange 10y ago
All this talk about "China/America/Russia"'s backyard makes me feel like we are returning to the days of feuding empires where the little countries don't matter. I guess big countries deserve big backyards and there's no such thing as Vietnam's backyard, or Mexico's backyard, or Sweden's backyard etc.
- nickff 10y ago
  Whenever I read a story like this or a comment like yours, I remember the following proverb: >When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. I first heard it mentioned with respect to the Cold War in Africa, but the (Kenyan tribal) proverb seems to apply quite widely.
- niftich 10y ago
  But do they matter on the world sphere where the playground is dominated by a few players with nukes, navies, and large-enough domestic economies to be able to enact sanctions? I come from a small country. There's a few in Europe, known for good wines or thermal baths or scenic sights or ethnic foods, but their continued existence is only guaranteed by their membership in a mutual defense pact. Those who aren't part of such an arrangement are out of luck -- "international outrage" does not protect sovereignty, as we have seen time and time again. Right now, there's little need to conquer territory when you can just make everyone reliant on your for technology (USA), rare earth minerals (China), or natural gas (Russia). But as resources get more scarce, what is Latvia to do? Hungary? The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia? With their cash flowing to foreign powers for technology, raw materials, and energy, rely on tourism, find some unique skill niche, or try to become a tax haven?
  - vtange 10y ago
    I totally agree with you that geopolitics matter, no matter how much one wishes we could just live in a world that isn't "might makes right". But I'd still argue that using terms like "Russia's backyard" or "China's backyard" dangerously colors entire regions their color without regard for whether the countries in the region want to be associated with their nearby superpower. Germany once had nearly all of Europe and Japan once had nearly all of Asia. Couldn't one say at the time the U.K. was in Germany's backyard and China in Japan's?

nullnilvoid 10y ago

It is very clear that the US is trying to spy on China. I don't blame China for taking the drones. If Russia sends drones to Hawaii, the US will take them too.

MrZongle2 10y ago
The drone was operating in international waters. How, then, is China justified in taking it? Isn't that simply theft? It would have been another thing entirely if the drone were operating within Chinese territory.
- roywiggins 10y ago
  In international waters? I'd call it piracy.
  - Brockenstein 10y ago
    And pirates are pretty cool...
  - Brockenstein 10y ago
    And pirates are pretty cool...
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    It can only be piracy if done for private ends. Done on behalf of a government, it's simply an act of war.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- MrZongle2 10y ago
  Judging by the voting, I can only assume that at least a few HN users side with the Chinese thieves. And are incapable of posting a coherent rebuttal. Sounds about right.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  As is often the case in international politics, the justification is "well, what are you going to do about it, then?"
hang 10y ago
and yeah they don't do that!
- jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
  You are mistaken. Russia maintains survey vessels as well and regularly patrols just outside the US's exclusive economic zone.
  - forgotmysn 10y ago
    Exactly. And we respect their right to hang out there because it's international waters.
forgotmysn 10y ago
I don't think that's clear at all. This drone was in International waters, not Chinese waters, and it sounds like this device was not capturing any actionable intelligence but data on how sound travels through water.
- sleepingeights 10y ago
  Well, they needed both drones to locate the source of any sounds detected in the water. With only one drone, their tests can determine what sounds were made (and maybe some general vicinity), but not as accurately from where. The Chinese already surprised a US carrier fleet by deploying a submarine fleet that "ambushed" a carrier when one of their subs surfaced in kill range to the carrier, undetected.

anigbrowl 10y ago

The fact that this has military applications as well as scientific/commercial ones doesn't bother me. They were firmly in international rather than disputed waters, I'm pretty sure other countries eyeball our ocean shelf too and it doesn't bother me either. To be honest I don't think China cares all that much either because they're used to the US Navy sailing about as a reminder of our treaties with various other SE Asian countries. They're veen assertive about their territorial claims with the nine-dash line, the building of artificial islands (reportedly now weaponized), and rejecting the decision of the international maritime court recently. Overall I'd characterize relations between the Chinese government and the Obama administration as cool but respectful. I don't know what's happening with the incoming administration and don't want to make a political argument here, but I do think that publicizing the fact of the conversation between Trump and the Taiwanese President, along with the public questioning of the One China policy, probably seems like a huge loss of face for Beijing. China doesn't mind the US having relations, even friendship, with Taiwan - through private channels. Public recognition of the Taiwanese government as a sovereign entity by the US is insulting though - much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC. Edit: great username btw

hatchback176 10y ago
They didn't roll out the red carpet for Obama, you're being stupid.
sweetjesus 10y ago
> is insulting much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC speaking somewhat loosely, actually there is no "much as if" in this sense. The Chinese have a "face saving is the most important thing" culture, and the US does not. Think of it more like the tribal regions of the -stans: China is metaphorically ready to do some honor killing over this in a way we can't grok. Doesn't mean we should acquiesce of course. I'd perhaps make the analogy that everybody in the Chinese government is as thin skinned as Trump. (I'm exaggerating to make analogies here, no need to jump all over me, of course it's more nuanced.) Meanwhile, our neighboring Mexican politicians publically pour scorn on the US all the time and it doesn't particularly affect our relations (not sure if Trump can take it tho) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept) In any case, it would not actually bother the US all that much if China talked to Hawaii, nor does it bother US that China talks to the Philippines; it would be to our benefit if China and the Philippines resolved their differences mutually, and the same with Taiwan; it does bother US that the Philippines would make short-sighted unwise bargains inasmuch as we get the sense that we will be involved in cleaning up the mess later, and inasmuch as it reinforces China's belief that they should throw their weight around more WRT the Biển Đông (the East Sea, off the coast of Vietnam;)

hang 10y ago

My government just did the right thing.

forgotmysn 10y ago
If this had occurred within Chinese waters, I might be inclined to agree with you. However, this occurred in International waters, and your government had no right to steal the vehicle.
- whybroke 10y ago
  Contrary to international opinion, China believes the South China Sea is in territory owing to an 1940s document containing an '11 dash line' So in the legal opinion of all the world minus China it is theft. In the legal opinion of China it is not. Unfortunately this subtly can not be expressed in a 140 char tweet so the situation deteriorates weekly. (EDIT: beautiful details by jwtadvice here ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13195427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13195427
  - forgotmysn 10y ago
    The situation deteriorates because China refuses to acknowledge international law, not because their bull shit excuses not to don't fit in a tweet.
    - fjdlwlv 10y ago
      International law isn't law if it isn't acknowledged.
    - whybroke 10y ago
      Unfortunately being right is of small consultation if the situation is plunged into economic, diplomatic and military disaster by an ill-informed tweeting leader.
anigbrowl 10y ago
Perhaps, but without providing reasons for your answer it's kind of meaningless.

bpodgursky 10y ago

Welp. For a while I thought HN was too low profile to fall to the astroturfers. I guess all good things end.

whybroke 10y ago
This is actually a very serious problem. Not necessarily astroturfing but high quality topics are easily swept from the front page or the replies turn into an endless slop of loony-spam by people who's ideology is threatened.

vtange 10y ago

All this talk about "China/America/Russia"'s backyard makes me feel like we are returning to the days of feuding empires where the little countries don't matter. I guess big countries deserve big backyards and there's no such thing as Vietnam's backyard, or Mexico's backyard, or Sweden's backyard etc.

nickff 10y ago
Whenever I read a story like this or a comment like yours, I remember the following proverb: >When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. I first heard it mentioned with respect to the Cold War in Africa, but the (Kenyan tribal) proverb seems to apply quite widely.
niftich 10y ago
But do they matter on the world sphere where the playground is dominated by a few players with nukes, navies, and large-enough domestic economies to be able to enact sanctions? I come from a small country. There's a few in Europe, known for good wines or thermal baths or scenic sights or ethnic foods, but their continued existence is only guaranteed by their membership in a mutual defense pact. Those who aren't part of such an arrangement are out of luck -- "international outrage" does not protect sovereignty, as we have seen time and time again. Right now, there's little need to conquer territory when you can just make everyone reliant on your for technology (USA), rare earth minerals (China), or natural gas (Russia). But as resources get more scarce, what is Latvia to do? Hungary? The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia? With their cash flowing to foreign powers for technology, raw materials, and energy, rely on tourism, find some unique skill niche, or try to become a tax haven?
- vtange 10y ago
  I totally agree with you that geopolitics matter, no matter how much one wishes we could just live in a world that isn't "might makes right". But I'd still argue that using terms like "Russia's backyard" or "China's backyard" dangerously colors entire regions their color without regard for whether the countries in the region want to be associated with their nearby superpower. Germany once had nearly all of Europe and Japan once had nearly all of Asia. Couldn't one say at the time the U.K. was in Germany's backyard and China in Japan's?