4 ms·

> superficial things like the gamepad, that did not cause or contribute to the fault In the prior dive, a passenger hit the sub into a rock. How does that not

> superficial things like the gamepad, that did not cause or contribute to the fault In the prior dive, a passenger hit the sub into a rock. How does that not contribute?

somat 2y ago
Don't let the passengers drive? that is unfair, teach them how not to hit rocks? Also unfair, sorry can't help myself today. Really I suppose it depends on how hard and where they hit the rock, was it a failure of of the gamepad that lead to the rock hit? that is, dead controls and drifting (those infernal radio gamepads, amiright) If I remember correctly the whole sub had an outer shroud anyway. how much damage to the outer shroud was done? Anyway, I don't really want to be the guy defending oceangate, I think a carbon fiber submarine sounds like a monumentally ill founded idea in the first place, and the move fast and break things attitude they employed in their engineering process should have never gone anywhere near a passenger. but at first thought, at the speeds the sub moved I doubt a rock hit would damage the sub. if I had to bet, it was plastic deformation leading to delamination and fatigue.
- smittywerben 2y ago
  They allege that this system was designed by students or recent graduates from Washington University who have no real experience. I don't think it's the student's fault. Showing Rush tossing the controller while saying "it's bluetooth so I can hand it to anybody... it's meant for a 16 year old to throw it around and super durable" is powerful imagery for a jury. The complaint specifically mentions Bluetooth, which I can't tell if it's an error. They switched from the DualShock controller used in Cyclops I, which does use Bluetooth. There is probably a reason they switched wireless technologies (Bluetooth is even worse than Logitech's 2.4 GHz wireless), which if not documented, could also show negligence. Your carbon fiber hull fatigue theory is interesting. I picture it sitting out in the hot sun and cold nights for months. It reminds me of the CNA building in Chicago, where windows fractured due to uneven sun exposure. The owners didn't replace them until one fell and killed a pedestrian, resulting in an $18 million settlement in 1975.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    > powerful imagery for a jury Be careful: are you trying to predict legal results, or find truth? Those are (unfortunately) rather different questions. If you're looking for truth, you don't care about what makes "powerful imagery for a jury". BTW, the "carbon fiber hull fatigue" theory is not GPs, it's the extremely obvious top candidate for the failure. Anyway, there is still no evidence that using a gamepad had any concrete negative effect. Letting passengers drive? Yeah, that's a problem. But it would be at least as big a problem with industry standard controls, which wouldn't even have the faint advantage of familiarity.
    - smittywerben 2y ago
      The switch from the Dualshock to the Logitech, as a system designed by students, demonstrates negligence that led to the catastrophe. Had the system not been designed by students, it would not use a wireless game controller. You could argue it in your head but in reality, which is part of the claim, no such system exists in any submarine.
      - andrewflnr 2y ago
        Why are you so determined to make the gamepad mean something? Is it not enough that the whole design of the sub was fundamentally flawed? Anyway, the best sense I can make of your logic is that designedByStudents -> gamepad, and designedByStudents -> negligence, therefore gamepad -> negligence. In that case I believe your fallacy is "affirming the consequent", with a side of ad populum w.r.t other submarines. I don't see how changing the type of controller fits in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
        smittywerben 2y ago
        I'm not affirming the consequent here. I'm saying don't dismiss the gamepad claim outright. As I said, it's not normal for a sub traveling miles under water to have electronics sourced from Walmart's toy section. This thread is about the gamepad. The lawsuit mentions it. It's relevant. Period.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  To be fair, a sharp impact to the hull would definitely have made the ongoing fatigue worse, and could even been the trigger for a failure. (Of course this continues to have nothing to do with the gamepad.)

> superficial things like the gamepad, that did not cause or contribute to the fault In the prior dive, a passenger hit the sub into a rock. How does that not contribute?

somat 2y ago

Don't let the passengers drive? that is unfair, teach them how not to hit rocks? Also unfair, sorry can't help myself today. Really I suppose it depends on how hard and where they hit the rock, was it a failure of of the gamepad that lead to the rock hit? that is, dead controls and drifting (those infernal radio gamepads, amiright) If I remember correctly the whole sub had an outer shroud anyway. how much damage to the outer shroud was done? Anyway, I don't really want to be the guy defending oceangate, I think a carbon fiber submarine sounds like a monumentally ill founded idea in the first place, and the move fast and break things attitude they employed in their engineering process should have never gone anywhere near a passenger. but at first thought, at the speeds the sub moved I doubt a rock hit would damage the sub. if I had to bet, it was plastic deformation leading to delamination and fatigue.

smittywerben 2y ago
They allege that this system was designed by students or recent graduates from Washington University who have no real experience. I don't think it's the student's fault. Showing Rush tossing the controller while saying "it's bluetooth so I can hand it to anybody... it's meant for a 16 year old to throw it around and super durable" is powerful imagery for a jury. The complaint specifically mentions Bluetooth, which I can't tell if it's an error. They switched from the DualShock controller used in Cyclops I, which does use Bluetooth. There is probably a reason they switched wireless technologies (Bluetooth is even worse than Logitech's 2.4 GHz wireless), which if not documented, could also show negligence. Your carbon fiber hull fatigue theory is interesting. I picture it sitting out in the hot sun and cold nights for months. It reminds me of the CNA building in Chicago, where windows fractured due to uneven sun exposure. The owners didn't replace them until one fell and killed a pedestrian, resulting in an $18 million settlement in 1975.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  > powerful imagery for a jury Be careful: are you trying to predict legal results, or find truth? Those are (unfortunately) rather different questions. If you're looking for truth, you don't care about what makes "powerful imagery for a jury". BTW, the "carbon fiber hull fatigue" theory is not GPs, it's the extremely obvious top candidate for the failure. Anyway, there is still no evidence that using a gamepad had any concrete negative effect. Letting passengers drive? Yeah, that's a problem. But it would be at least as big a problem with industry standard controls, which wouldn't even have the faint advantage of familiarity.
  - smittywerben 2y ago
    The switch from the Dualshock to the Logitech, as a system designed by students, demonstrates negligence that led to the catastrophe. Had the system not been designed by students, it would not use a wireless game controller. You could argue it in your head but in reality, which is part of the claim, no such system exists in any submarine.
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      Why are you so determined to make the gamepad mean something? Is it not enough that the whole design of the sub was fundamentally flawed? Anyway, the best sense I can make of your logic is that designedByStudents -> gamepad, and designedByStudents -> negligence, therefore gamepad -> negligence. In that case I believe your fallacy is "affirming the consequent", with a side of ad populum w.r.t other submarines. I don't see how changing the type of controller fits in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
      - smittywerben 2y ago
        I'm not affirming the consequent here. I'm saying don't dismiss the gamepad claim outright. As I said, it's not normal for a sub traveling miles under water to have electronics sourced from Walmart's toy section. This thread is about the gamepad. The lawsuit mentions it. It's relevant. Period.
andrewflnr 2y ago
To be fair, a sharp impact to the hull would definitely have made the ongoing fatigue worse, and could even been the trigger for a failure. (Of course this continues to have nothing to do with the gamepad.)