6 ms·

600 refugees drowned in the mediterranean and the captain of one of the non profit rescue vessels operating in the mediterranean is facing 20 years in prison.

by gmerc 3y ago

600 refugees drowned in the mediterranean and the captain of one of the non profit rescue vessels operating in the mediterranean is facing 20 years in prison. barf.

bilekas 3y ago
While on principle I agree. It doesn't matter. There can be 2 problems at the same time. Whatever people focus on shouldn't be a topic. Edit: That seems far more callous than it was meant. You're right, people are forced to travel the sea almost daily, desperate people will do anything. This IS different. And hits different because it was a choice, with a real discussion about "Hey, it's really possible you can die, and you already have a rich life" The fact it's rich people should show that it's a completely different scenario. As for media coverage. I would agree.
- bilekas 3y ago
  Edit x2: Just incase it wasn't clear. It's different because 'we' would never think to jump on an overflowing boat. 'We' could imagine taking an 'adventure' in a submarine. So it relates to 'us'. This isn't a dig or insult. But context matters.
- sacnoradhq 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    Not all of them: the son of the Pakistani businessman was truly innocent here. He was terrified of going on this foolhardy voyage and only went along because he didn't want to upset his dumb dad.
    - finitemonkey 3y ago
      At age 19, you can disconnect from your parents if they do dumb things you don't agree with and drag yourself down. Quite literally in this case. It can impact your life financially, i.e., he might have faced foregoing an inheritance and heaving to build wealth himself instead of relying on the billions of his dad. But that's his choice, so don't relieve him from his own responsibility. He wasn't 5.
      - tough 3y ago
        I've done pretty dumb things when I was that age. I'm thankfull I didn't have access or was challenged to go into a sub-4000ft expedition into the titanic wreck. I did pass over the wreck on a Cruiseship, I thank my mother for his normie preferences and lifestyle now
  - AYBABTME 3y ago
    rich on a sub === assholes, enemies of all life on the planet. Flawless logic here.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  >There can be 2 problems at the same time. >Whatever people focus on shouldn't be a topic. On the contrary, I think what people focus on is irrelevant topic for reflection and more importantly introspection. It's important to know what Yanks your emotional chains and who is yanking them. Looking at what drives public attention lets you know what people really care about, not what they might say they care about. You can learn some hard truth about reality by observing the actions of others.
  - bilekas 3y ago
    I can't argue with that actually, I just think there is a time and place for that introspective reflection.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      I think it's less about time and place and more about tone and intent in discussion and debate. That is to say, it's not a bad time to talk about these things unless you are speaking with friends and family of The Departed. However, if people want to have a real conversation exploring what drives public attention, they need to treat it as a real conversation. This means engaging the person that you're talking with good faith, respect, and an open mind.
KingOfCoders 3y ago
Both media reports are vanity. They don't impact the reader, don't change society and have no repercussions. Both are read for (different) emotional value. People don't change their life or opinion because of either of them.
- runarberg 3y ago
  While I agree there is a fair amount of indifference when it comes to consuming media. However stating it as zero effect is far from true. There are several examples of powerful journalism having profound effects on the general public. And repeated coverage has been demonstrated to be capable of changing opinions. In the case of the refugee boat—but not so much the submarine—it occured because of a policy choice of the leaders of many news observers. These leaders have the power to prevents disasters like these. And media coverage has been shown in the past to be able to influence leaders in making some policy changes.
  - KingOfCoders 3y ago
    Refugees die in the Mediteranian in large numbers for more than 30 years [0]. With ample media coverage for decades and no policy changes. So I stand with my previous argument of "People don't change their life or opinion because of either of them." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_incidents_on_the_Mediterranean_Sea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_inciden...
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it? On the one hand we have people who fear they will come and increasingly vote right wing and succesfully pressured sea rescue organisations in not operating in the mediterran sea anymore and on the other hand we have people donating lots of money to private sea rescue organisations that do operate there and also rescue refugees.
      - KingOfCoders 3y ago
Gibbon1 3y ago
About 1000 children died of malaria yesterday. 1000 died today. And another 1000 will die tomorrow.
- midoridensha 3y ago
  What the heck happened to that "photonic shield" that Bill Gates' foundation was working on to zap mosquitoes with lasers? It's been years now. Seems like a good idea and they successfully prototyped it.
  - finitemonkey 3y ago
    He's still busy microchipping everybody in the west, you know..
  - tim333 3y ago
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/laser-shooting-mosquito-death-machine-nathan-myhrvold.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/laser-shooting-mosqu... >despite Myhrvold’s enthusiasm, the Photonic Fence hasn’t been all that easy to actually build >...laser is not safe for your eyes >...no one has yet worked out how to make the device cheap enough The new vaccine may do better https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62797776 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62797776
    - midoridensha 3y ago
      The vaccine doesn't help for what I really want this invention for: to kill mosquitoes. The malaria benefit is great, of course, for parts of the world that have that problem, but here in other parts of the world, even without malaria, mosquitoes are a nuisance. I'd pay 10x the targeted price of this thing for a device that zaps human-biting mosquitoes, and I'm sure lots of other people would too, so that "cheap enough" part doesn't sound right to me. They don't need to make it cheap enough, initially, to sell to impoverished nations that have malaria problems; they just need to make it cheap enough to sell to rich nations with people who are tired of being bitten by mosquitoes. Then, after they do this for a while and build up economies of scale, the costs should come down and it should be possible to sell them significantly cheaper to poorer nations for their original purpose. As for being safe for eyes, I thought part of the idea was to make sure there was nothing in between the mosquito and the laser before firing, though I'm not sure exactly what the plan there was.
4gotunameagain 3y ago
To be pedantic, it was immigrants, not refugees. It is unnecessary sensationalisation to claim they were refugees. Unless of course in your point of view anyone that seeks a better future to avoid problems in their own country is a refugee, which could be a point of view but not one I (or dictionaries) agree with.
- jachee 3y ago
  These aren’t people who applied to immigrate, following the prescribed process. They’re desperate people who are being literally smuggled across the Mediterranean to seek refuge in Europe. How are they not refugees?
  - 4gotunameagain 3y ago
    Illegal immigrant and refugee are different terms. UNHCR: Refugees are people who have been forced to flee their homes and have crossed an international border to find safety in another country. Like the previous comment, you could argue that complex geopolitical circumstances "forced" these people to illegally immigrate, but then you could argue that everything is forced. You could argue that Europeans moving from one country to another because there is no work in their field are "forced". Are they refugees ? Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan declared Monday a day of mourning for Pakistanis who died after a fishing boat There is no immediate threat of life in Pakistan. They were not refugees.
- fishoutofth 3y ago
  I would argue paying a smuggler between $1,000 and $8,600 (quick google search) to hopefully get you across the sea (instead of selling you in a slave market) is a risk most people living in adequate conditions are not willing to take.
  - 4gotunameagain 3y ago
    I did not claim that they lived in adequate conditions. I claimed that they were not forced to leave or that they did not have an immediate threat to their life. There are different terms for a reason. Because they are different things. Are pakistani people leaving their country the same as Syrians fleeing a warzone ?

by gmerc 3y ago

600 refugees drowned in the mediterranean and the captain of one of the non profit rescue vessels operating in the mediterranean is facing 20 years in prison. barf.

bilekas 3y ago

While on principle I agree. It doesn't matter. There can be 2 problems at the same time. Whatever people focus on shouldn't be a topic. Edit: That seems far more callous than it was meant. You're right, people are forced to travel the sea almost daily, desperate people will do anything. This IS different. And hits different because it was a choice, with a real discussion about "Hey, it's really possible you can die, and you already have a rich life" The fact it's rich people should show that it's a completely different scenario. As for media coverage. I would agree.

bilekas 3y ago
Edit x2: Just incase it wasn't clear. It's different because 'we' would never think to jump on an overflowing boat. 'We' could imagine taking an 'adventure' in a submarine. So it relates to 'us'. This isn't a dig or insult. But context matters.
sacnoradhq 3y ago
[flagged]
- midoridensha 3y ago
  Not all of them: the son of the Pakistani businessman was truly innocent here. He was terrified of going on this foolhardy voyage and only went along because he didn't want to upset his dumb dad.
  - finitemonkey 3y ago
    At age 19, you can disconnect from your parents if they do dumb things you don't agree with and drag yourself down. Quite literally in this case. It can impact your life financially, i.e., he might have faced foregoing an inheritance and heaving to build wealth himself instead of relying on the billions of his dad. But that's his choice, so don't relieve him from his own responsibility. He wasn't 5.
    - tough 3y ago
      I've done pretty dumb things when I was that age. I'm thankfull I didn't have access or was challenged to go into a sub-4000ft expedition into the titanic wreck. I did pass over the wreck on a Cruiseship, I thank my mother for his normie preferences and lifestyle now
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  rich on a sub === assholes, enemies of all life on the planet. Flawless logic here.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
>There can be 2 problems at the same time. >Whatever people focus on shouldn't be a topic. On the contrary, I think what people focus on is irrelevant topic for reflection and more importantly introspection. It's important to know what Yanks your emotional chains and who is yanking them. Looking at what drives public attention lets you know what people really care about, not what they might say they care about. You can learn some hard truth about reality by observing the actions of others.
- bilekas 3y ago
  I can't argue with that actually, I just think there is a time and place for that introspective reflection.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I think it's less about time and place and more about tone and intent in discussion and debate. That is to say, it's not a bad time to talk about these things unless you are speaking with friends and family of The Departed. However, if people want to have a real conversation exploring what drives public attention, they need to treat it as a real conversation. This means engaging the person that you're talking with good faith, respect, and an open mind.

KingOfCoders 3y ago

Both media reports are vanity. They don't impact the reader, don't change society and have no repercussions. Both are read for (different) emotional value. People don't change their life or opinion because of either of them.

runarberg 3y ago
While I agree there is a fair amount of indifference when it comes to consuming media. However stating it as zero effect is far from true. There are several examples of powerful journalism having profound effects on the general public. And repeated coverage has been demonstrated to be capable of changing opinions. In the case of the refugee boat—but not so much the submarine—it occured because of a policy choice of the leaders of many news observers. These leaders have the power to prevents disasters like these. And media coverage has been shown in the past to be able to influence leaders in making some policy changes.
- KingOfCoders 3y ago
  Refugees die in the Mediteranian in large numbers for more than 30 years [0]. With ample media coverage for decades and no policy changes. So I stand with my previous argument of "People don't change their life or opinion because of either of them." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_incidents_on_the_Mediterranean_Sea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_inciden...
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it? On the one hand we have people who fear they will come and increasingly vote right wing and succesfully pressured sea rescue organisations in not operating in the mediterran sea anymore and on the other hand we have people donating lots of money to private sea rescue organisations that do operate there and also rescue refugees.
    - KingOfCoders 3y ago

Gibbon1 3y ago

About 1000 children died of malaria yesterday. 1000 died today. And another 1000 will die tomorrow.

midoridensha 3y ago
What the heck happened to that "photonic shield" that Bill Gates' foundation was working on to zap mosquitoes with lasers? It's been years now. Seems like a good idea and they successfully prototyped it.
- finitemonkey 3y ago
  He's still busy microchipping everybody in the west, you know..
- tim333 3y ago
  https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/laser-shooting-mosquito-death-machine-nathan-myhrvold.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/laser-shooting-mosqu... >despite Myhrvold’s enthusiasm, the Photonic Fence hasn’t been all that easy to actually build >...laser is not safe for your eyes >...no one has yet worked out how to make the device cheap enough The new vaccine may do better https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62797776 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62797776
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    The vaccine doesn't help for what I really want this invention for: to kill mosquitoes. The malaria benefit is great, of course, for parts of the world that have that problem, but here in other parts of the world, even without malaria, mosquitoes are a nuisance. I'd pay 10x the targeted price of this thing for a device that zaps human-biting mosquitoes, and I'm sure lots of other people would too, so that "cheap enough" part doesn't sound right to me. They don't need to make it cheap enough, initially, to sell to impoverished nations that have malaria problems; they just need to make it cheap enough to sell to rich nations with people who are tired of being bitten by mosquitoes. Then, after they do this for a while and build up economies of scale, the costs should come down and it should be possible to sell them significantly cheaper to poorer nations for their original purpose. As for being safe for eyes, I thought part of the idea was to make sure there was nothing in between the mosquito and the laser before firing, though I'm not sure exactly what the plan there was.

4gotunameagain 3y ago

To be pedantic, it was immigrants, not refugees. It is unnecessary sensationalisation to claim they were refugees. Unless of course in your point of view anyone that seeks a better future to avoid problems in their own country is a refugee, which could be a point of view but not one I (or dictionaries) agree with.

jachee 3y ago
These aren’t people who applied to immigrate, following the prescribed process. They’re desperate people who are being literally smuggled across the Mediterranean to seek refuge in Europe. How are they not refugees?
- 4gotunameagain 3y ago
  Illegal immigrant and refugee are different terms. UNHCR: Refugees are people who have been forced to flee their homes and have crossed an international border to find safety in another country. Like the previous comment, you could argue that complex geopolitical circumstances "forced" these people to illegally immigrate, but then you could argue that everything is forced. You could argue that Europeans moving from one country to another because there is no work in their field are "forced". Are they refugees ? Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan declared Monday a day of mourning for Pakistanis who died after a fishing boat There is no immediate threat of life in Pakistan. They were not refugees.
fishoutofth 3y ago
I would argue paying a smuggler between $1,000 and $8,600 (quick google search) to hopefully get you across the sea (instead of selling you in a slave market) is a risk most people living in adequate conditions are not willing to take.
- 4gotunameagain 3y ago
  I did not claim that they lived in adequate conditions. I claimed that they were not forced to leave or that they did not have an immediate threat to their life. There are different terms for a reason. Because they are different things. Are pakistani people leaving their country the same as Syrians fleeing a warzone ?