3 ms·

> As opposed to the professionals who went with a microsoft xbox controller? I think what's more telling is that they didn't even splurge on the actual Microso

> As opposed to the professionals who went with a microsoft xbox controller? I think what's more telling is that they didn't even splurge on the actual Microsoft Xbox controller. They cheaped out with an unproven logitech gamepad. When you're already doing something in an unorthodox way at least don't half-ass it. > The company in question might be full of jokers, but your points don’t quite illistrate this well. They are about appearances and not substance. Your distinction is a bit arbitrary. Every point about this company will always be about appearances unless you have first-hand accounts or experiences. Otherwise, info on the company's technology, choices, strategies or anything else will always be based on appearance. In the absence of more concrete evidence, these small indicators can at least provide something to infer from.

krisoft 3y ago
> Your distinction is a bit arbitrary. Every point about this company will always be about appearances unless you have first-hand accounts or experiences. Not really. Here is a substance based argument: there is no underwater FAA. This company, and any other private submarine company is setting their own quality level and then marking their own homework to see if they have met it. In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this. Then you can ask them about their tech and procedures. Do they have redundant means of communication? Do they have multiply redundant means to release the ballast? How many hull penetrations there are and how are they implemented? If they are unwilling to discuss these questions that is worse than a bad answer. Some comments are criticising their choice of carbon fiber for the middle section of their pressure vessel. I don’t know enough about the engineering there to decide for myself if that criticism is fair or not but that is an argument about substance not appearance.
- beowulfey 3y ago
  I think this is the big thing for me. David Pogue, when he went on a dive with them last year, pointed out that the vessel has no beacon [1]; yet the door bolts from the outside. Apparently there was a five-hour period where the company did not know the location of the sub after it resurfaced. To me, that seems crazy. Having a GPS beacon seems like a no-brainer for safety purposes. It feels indicative of the engineering as a whole. [1]: https://twitter.com/Pogue/status/1670826522138091521 https://twitter.com/Pogue/status/1670826522138091521
- delfinom 3y ago
  >In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this Please if you are incentivized to cut $10 on the main control interface of your expensive sub that is incredibly low volume production, you have some fundamental cultural problems and its not a business decision.
- delfinom 3y ago
  >In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this Please if you are incentivized to cut $10 on the main control interface of your expensive sub that also is to drive your business, you have some fundamental cultural problems beyond "commercial environment".

krisoft 3y ago

> Your distinction is a bit arbitrary. Every point about this company will always be about appearances unless you have first-hand accounts or experiences. Not really. Here is a substance based argument: there is no underwater FAA. This company, and any other private submarine company is setting their own quality level and then marking their own homework to see if they have met it. In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this. Then you can ask them about their tech and procedures. Do they have redundant means of communication? Do they have multiply redundant means to release the ballast? How many hull penetrations there are and how are they implemented? If they are unwilling to discuss these questions that is worse than a bad answer. Some comments are criticising their choice of carbon fiber for the middle section of their pressure vessel. I don’t know enough about the engineering there to decide for myself if that criticism is fair or not but that is an argument about substance not appearance.

beowulfey 3y ago
I think this is the big thing for me. David Pogue, when he went on a dive with them last year, pointed out that the vessel has no beacon [1]; yet the door bolts from the outside. Apparently there was a five-hour period where the company did not know the location of the sub after it resurfaced. To me, that seems crazy. Having a GPS beacon seems like a no-brainer for safety purposes. It feels indicative of the engineering as a whole. [1]: https://twitter.com/Pogue/status/1670826522138091521 https://twitter.com/Pogue/status/1670826522138091521
delfinom 3y ago
>In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this Please if you are incentivized to cut $10 on the main control interface of your expensive sub that is incredibly low volume production, you have some fundamental cultural problems and its not a business decision.
delfinom 3y ago
>In a commercial environment they are incentivised to cut corners and there is no external force resisting this Please if you are incentivized to cut $10 on the main control interface of your expensive sub that also is to drive your business, you have some fundamental cultural problems beyond "commercial environment".