5 ms·

> This controller is a metaphor for something that needs to immediately be regulated so that people like this can never get away with it again. There is someth

> This controller is a metaphor for something that needs to immediately be regulated so that people like this can never get away with it again. There is something to be said for protecting people who would sign up for such an experience while misjudging the risk, or assuming that some government agency does provide oversight. Though, customers seem to have been informed that this is not the case: https://twitter.com/FridaGhitis/status/1671120043126423553 https://twitter.com/FridaGhitis/status/1671120043126423553 But apart from that, if someone wants to build a lego submarine and use it to dive to the Titanic, they should have every right to do so. It is their risk to take. Asking others to pay to join does not change this moral calculus. And yes, the people left on the surface have an ethical responsibility to not unreasonably refuse to rescue them when things to awry.

Eisenstein 3y ago
Sorry but that doesn't work in a reasonable society. You can't let just anyone do anything they want with the repercussions being 'they don't get rescued'. A few points: * You can't let rescue services decide who deserves to be rescued -- for so many obvious reasons it would be patronizing to list them * People with a lot of money and no sense can fuck things up on a massive scale if we let them do whatever they wanted * Human society is not a free-for-all. As much as the civil libertarian tendencies in me want to say 'sure, do whatever you want, just don't mess with anyone else's stuff', it really isn't that simple Shame and societal norms are a big deal in keeping people in check. Just getting yelled at in public for doing something objectionable is enough to keep most people from spitting indoors or pissing on crowded subway platform or what-have-you. When shame doesn't work we rely on laws. Laws must be universally enforced and they must be fairly enforced and they must be seen to be enforced. If we allow idiots with stupid ideas to get lucky enough times then they become looked up to and the shame goes away. To the same end if the shame doesn't stop them we need to physically stop them or take away their ability to do the societally harmful thing they want to do. People need to re-learn that you should be embarrassed for failing when what you strove to do was stupid and destructive.
- darkerside 3y ago
  This is the wisest comment I've read in a while. Trump, depending on your politics, is either the beginning or end state of that particular problem.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  I suspect this loss will be as effective as any regulation. Nobody will get on board one of these subs without doing a lot more due diligence than the present customers did. And if they do, well, that's on them. Believe it or not, new laws aren't always the answer. You can't bubble-wrap the world and you will make it a worse place for everyone if you try.
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    I didn't say anything about making new laws. I am proposing that our society is heading in the wrong direction by lionizing people who take stupid risks and win.
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      Yeah, I'm mostly addressing truemotive's knee-jerk post above. Let's at least wait for the failure analysis reports before calling for congressional hearings. In other words, don't send a lawyer to do an engineer's job.
- belorn 3y ago
  In the general case that is more or less accurate. There are however a bunch of exceptions in the extreme case. Rescue services do have a point where they will decide not to continue. During the Tham Luang cave rescue (the thai football boys that got stuck in a cave) there was a period where the rescue services decided that continuing was just too dangerous. It was only because of a handful private cave divers was crazy enough to try a exceptional dangerous idea that those children got out there alive, and had it failed then those cave divers would have basically received all the blame. The case do illustrate how far into the extreme we have to go. The local rescue services gave up and gave the job to nation service. The national service gave up and gave it to the military (with international support). The military gave up, and then through almost a backdoor, a few individuals tried a Hail Mary attempt which against all odds worked well enough to get everyone home. There are activities where people has to accept that rescue is limited or zero. If you go hiking in no man land then there is a real risk of rescue service not being able to locate you. People who attempt sailing around the world has the risk of being "lost to sea". Cave explorers both dry and wet has to accept that rescue attempts are done based on what is feasible. Same goes for wreck divers. We could argue that those risky activities should be illegal (or shamed), but the counter argument is that a lot of activities are just inherently risky. Sports generate a huge amount of injuries. Motorcycles are viewed by health professionals as organ donor generators. Extreme sports are extreme, but they tend to also follow more rigorous training and certification in order to address those risk.
reddit_refugee3 3y ago
[flagged]
mrweasel 3y ago
Just watched the video in the Twitter post... What's the point of diving to the Titanic if all you have to observe it is that tiny window?

Eisenstein 3y ago

Sorry but that doesn't work in a reasonable society. You can't let just anyone do anything they want with the repercussions being 'they don't get rescued'. A few points: * You can't let rescue services decide who deserves to be rescued -- for so many obvious reasons it would be patronizing to list them * People with a lot of money and no sense can fuck things up on a massive scale if we let them do whatever they wanted * Human society is not a free-for-all. As much as the civil libertarian tendencies in me want to say 'sure, do whatever you want, just don't mess with anyone else's stuff', it really isn't that simple Shame and societal norms are a big deal in keeping people in check. Just getting yelled at in public for doing something objectionable is enough to keep most people from spitting indoors or pissing on crowded subway platform or what-have-you. When shame doesn't work we rely on laws. Laws must be universally enforced and they must be fairly enforced and they must be seen to be enforced. If we allow idiots with stupid ideas to get lucky enough times then they become looked up to and the shame goes away. To the same end if the shame doesn't stop them we need to physically stop them or take away their ability to do the societally harmful thing they want to do. People need to re-learn that you should be embarrassed for failing when what you strove to do was stupid and destructive.

darkerside 3y ago
This is the wisest comment I've read in a while. Trump, depending on your politics, is either the beginning or end state of that particular problem.
CamperBob2 3y ago
I suspect this loss will be as effective as any regulation. Nobody will get on board one of these subs without doing a lot more due diligence than the present customers did. And if they do, well, that's on them. Believe it or not, new laws aren't always the answer. You can't bubble-wrap the world and you will make it a worse place for everyone if you try.
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  I didn't say anything about making new laws. I am proposing that our society is heading in the wrong direction by lionizing people who take stupid risks and win.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    Yeah, I'm mostly addressing truemotive's knee-jerk post above. Let's at least wait for the failure analysis reports before calling for congressional hearings. In other words, don't send a lawyer to do an engineer's job.
belorn 3y ago
In the general case that is more or less accurate. There are however a bunch of exceptions in the extreme case. Rescue services do have a point where they will decide not to continue. During the Tham Luang cave rescue (the thai football boys that got stuck in a cave) there was a period where the rescue services decided that continuing was just too dangerous. It was only because of a handful private cave divers was crazy enough to try a exceptional dangerous idea that those children got out there alive, and had it failed then those cave divers would have basically received all the blame. The case do illustrate how far into the extreme we have to go. The local rescue services gave up and gave the job to nation service. The national service gave up and gave it to the military (with international support). The military gave up, and then through almost a backdoor, a few individuals tried a Hail Mary attempt which against all odds worked well enough to get everyone home. There are activities where people has to accept that rescue is limited or zero. If you go hiking in no man land then there is a real risk of rescue service not being able to locate you. People who attempt sailing around the world has the risk of being "lost to sea". Cave explorers both dry and wet has to accept that rescue attempts are done based on what is feasible. Same goes for wreck divers. We could argue that those risky activities should be illegal (or shamed), but the counter argument is that a lot of activities are just inherently risky. Sports generate a huge amount of injuries. Motorcycles are viewed by health professionals as organ donor generators. Extreme sports are extreme, but they tend to also follow more rigorous training and certification in order to address those risk.

reddit_refugee3 3y ago

[flagged]

mrweasel 3y ago

Just watched the video in the Twitter post... What's the point of diving to the Titanic if all you have to observe it is that tiny window?