8 ms·

This idea fails a basic reality check -- piracy. During my around-the-world solo sail (http://arachnoid.com/sailbook http://arachnoid.com/sailbook) I heard any

by lutusp 13y ago

This idea fails a basic reality check -- piracy. During my around-the-world solo sail (http://arachnoid.com/sailbook http://arachnoid.com/sailbook) I heard any number of accounts of cargo vessels being boarded by pirates late at night, to steal cargo and slip away undetected by the skeleton crew that shipping operators prefer. The idea of a robot vessel would only make this problem worse. The article says, "Unmanned ships would also reduce risks such as piracy, since there would be no hostages to capture ..." But much piracy, for example in the eastern Indian Ocean, is after cargo, not hostages. Pirates could disable the propulsion system of, then loot, a robot cargo ship in the far reaches of the Indian Ocean where governmental controls are much weaker than elsewhere.

gk1 13y ago
I think that's a solvable problem. As quoted in the article, just make the trouble of stealing cargo more hassle than it's worth. I'm not saying it'd be easy, but it's not the showstopper you make it out to be.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > As quoted in the article, just make the trouble of stealing cargo more hassle than it's worth. If that were feasible, shipping companies would have done it already. As to piracy, a robot ship represents an added risk, not a reduced one. Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point -- those who robbed Mt. Gox didn't have to risk a face-to-face confrontation with an armed guard. It's the same here. > I'm not saying it'd be easy, but it's not the showstopper you make it out to be. I'll bet that's what the backers of Bitcoin said -- until a week ago.
  - baddox 13y ago
    Has the Bitcoin show been stopped? I've been following the Bitcoin community fairly closely, and I must have missed it.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > Has the Bitcoin show been stopped? No, I don't think so, but the risks inherent in virtual currencies should now be obvious to everyone. Bitcoin may recover, but I think in the long term, much better software and transaction protocols will be required than now exist. Remember also that Mt. Gox wasn't the only large online Bitcoin theft: http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitcoins-stolen-unknown-amount/ http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitc...
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
  - gk1 13y ago
    > If that were feasible, shipping companies would have done it already. For shipping companies, it's not about feasibility. It's about profits. Thanks to insurance, they can afford to pay a ransom every now-and-then and therefore don't need to make the ships as secure as profits. Having no crew onboard would lower operating costs, leaving them with more money to spend on anti-piracy measures. And even then, they would only do it if the cost of adding said measures is less than the cost of insurance. > Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point That's not really a fair comparison, is it. Bank robbers aren't after ransoms, and neither are the guys who robbed MtGox.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      >> Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point ... > That's not really a fair comparison, is it. As a matter of fact, yes, it is. > Bank robbers aren't after ransoms, and neither are the guys who robbed MtGox. It's all about stealing other people's money. You're trying to say that the method one chooses to steal other people's money is more than a detail.
eurleif 13y ago
If there's no crew, why can't you just fill the entire thing with poison gas?
- dethstar 13y ago
  Some people believe lives are not just something you could take, you know, even if it's not people from the crew.
  - baddox 13y ago
    So then what is a crew on a normal ship going to do if pirates board?
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > So then what is a crew on a normal ship going to do if pirates board? You're not thinking this through. The reason pirates can board ships with relative safety is because the operators have realized that if they arm the crews, the pirates will simply kill everyone on board as a precaution. So a decision was made to avoid too much a show of force, because that would only invite retaliation in kind. After a ship has been taken over, that's different -- that's the time for a show of force, but training and arming cargo vessel crews as part-time soldiers was obviously a bad idea.
      - baddox 13y ago
        I don't think you're following the entire path of this comment tree. I realize all and agree with most of those things you said, but they're not immediately relevant. I was responding to dethstar's comment, which indicated that "some people" don't think the lives of people should be taken even if they're attempting to pirate a ship. You seem to recognize that force (and I assume you mean potentially deadly force) should be used against pirates, which is also my view. Dethstar claims that some people dispute this view.
        lutusp 13y ago
a1a 13y ago
It might still make economical sense to hire a gunship to protect the "droneships" while passing high-risk areas. Besides, take some of the money saved on salaries and use it for foreign aid to countries such as Somalia and you'd have stopped piracy before you know it.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > take some of the money saved on salaries and use it for foreign aid to countries such as Somalia and you'd have stopped piracy before you know it. No, that certainly won't work. With all respect, it's naive to think that foreign aid can solve the problem of poverty. In many cases it makes the problem worse. Consider the Diem regime in the early 1960s, South Vietnam. Copious American aid made the prior situation much worse, led to large amounts of corruption, and in part contributed to the eventual fall of South Vietnam. Look at foreign aid programs that don't also address political and social issues like basic human rights and reproductive choice for women. They always fail, and many make the original problems worse.
  - TeMPOraL 13y ago
    Bill Gates seems to disagree with you on this one: http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/#section=myth-two http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/#section=myth-two
    - nitrogen 13y ago
      Among some circles, disagreement with Bill Gates is a positive signal. In seriousness though, I don't think your link disagrees with lutusp's comment. The Gates Foundation seems to care about human rights and reproductive choice, the lack of which causes aid to fail (as claimed by the parent comment). In other words, I think lutusp is saying that dumping money into an impoverished environment will lead to corruption and more poverty, but more involved approaches that directly liberate the people can work.
    - brc 13y ago
      Bill Gates is pitching to have foreign aid directed through his charities. It certainly would make more sense for the aid to be directed through organizations with runs on the board and a capable organization. I think the parent should probably have said 'direct government-to-government foreign aid usually makes things worse'. Part of the thing Bill Gates is fighting against with his 'myth busting' is the bad reputation foreign aid has got because it goes directly from politician to politician, and not necessarily distributed or managed in accordance with what people know to work.
incision 13y ago
That's where the robot defense system comes in. Lack of crew will greatly simplify the implementation as it can be trained to fire on all humans without concern for friendly fire.
- dalke 13y ago
  Would it exclaim "Got the humanoid, got the intruder!" when that happens? :) Current maritime law doesn't allow for robot defense systems with lethal force. Consider too what happens if the Coast Guard wants to interdict but the distant operators "accidentally" forget to disable the defense system.
  - GVIrish 13y ago
    Memories of ED-209 malfunctions abound. I'd hate to be the guy that has to do maintainenance on a drone ship filled with kill bots.
  - Houshalter 13y ago
    It wouldn't necessarily be autonomous but remote controlled. Or have a single manned boat with security forces on it guarding dozens of unmanned ships in a fleet.
    - Perdition 13y ago
      So the pirates jam the radio frequencies for the control signal. Convoys are incredibly inefficient which is why they are only used in war time (it takes days to form a convoy due to loading times). And no security boat can protect hundreds of miles of ocean, which is why piracy is still alive today.
      - phazmatis 13y ago
        So the boat will submerge when it senses trouble. Then we'll get submarine pirates but... The barrier to entry would have expanded sufficiently.
baddox 13y ago
How do these pirates actually unload cargo? Do they actually have a way to unload entire crates (seems unlikely), or do they just break into one crate and fill up a backpack with iPads?
- gk1 13y ago
  They usually never intend to unload cargo, they just hold ship and/or crew hostage until they're paid a ransom. Hence the claim that without a crew on-board the risk of piracy goes down.
  - baddox 13y ago
    I was inquiring specifically about lutusp's comment: > I heard any number of accounts of cargo vessels being boarded by pirates late at night, to steal cargo and slip away undetected by the skeleton crew that shipping operators prefer.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      See my comment above for the answer -- there are a number of low-tech ways to board and loot a cargo ship.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > How do these pirates actually unload cargo? During my around-the-world solo sail (http://arachnoid.com/sailbook http://arachnoid.com/sailbook), I saw and heard any number of pirate stories. For example, in the Strait of Malacca, pirates will show up after dark in two wooden boats (no radar signature) with a rope slung between them. They stretch the rope across the bow of a passing freighter, which puts a wooden boat on each side of the ship, dragged along with it. Then they climb aboard, break the seals of some cargo containers, steal some electronics or something else easy to to carry off, climb back down into their boats and release the rope. Perfectly simple, low-tech, and because of the small size of modern cargo ship crews, likely to escape the attention of the crew.
  - 13y ago
fr0sty 13y ago
Were the thefts you heard about from container ships like this one?: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Eleonora_Maersk_DCT_3.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Eleonora_...
- lutusp 13y ago
  Yes, in that same class. The bulb on the bow makes it relatively easy to board using two small boats and a rope between them.
GigabyteCoin 13y ago
I doubt a ship made for only robot operators would have any human accessible doors. Pirates may be able to approach the ship, but entering is a different story. Cutting a hole in the side of the ship would be the only option I could see. Same goes for disabling the propulsion system. If there's no cockpit, there's no switch to disable anything.
- dalke 13y ago
  The Coast Guard won't like it if they can't board and inspect the ship. Have you seen a container ship? The containers are stacked out in the open. There's no need to have a door because there aren't any walls in the way. Cut the antennas, block the GPS signal, and what's the ship supposed to do besides stop?
  - GigabyteCoin 13y ago
    You make a good point about coast guard inspections. But all goods could be inspected when they arrive in dock to unload. The coast guard boarding moving ships for inspection I imagine would happen more to tiny fishing boats/speed boats accused of drug smuggling, etc. I doubt they're casually stopping freightliners "just to take a look around". As for blocking the GPS signal, again, you need to know where the GPS is hiding. It could be trailing 100ft behind the boat for all the pirate knows.
    - dalke 13y ago
      Navy SEALs Inspecting Radioactive Ship Off New Jersey - http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/09/12/navy-seals-inspecting-radioactive-ship-off-new-jersey/ http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/09/12/navy-seals-inspectin... On Tuesday November 3, a special Israel Navy force intercepted and boarded the cargo ship "Francop". Some 500 tons of weapons, rockets, and missiles were uncovered aboard the vessel, disguised as civilian cargo and hidden among hundreds of other containers. - http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pages/nava-force-intercepts-Iranian-weapon-ship-4-Nov-2009.aspx http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pa... Greece intercepts mystery ship with 20,000 Kalashnikovs onboard - http://rt.com/news/greek-seize-ship-kalashnikov-503/ http://rt.com/news/greek-seize-ship-kalashnikov-503/ The Israeli navy released Monday afternoon the HMS Beethoven, a Liberian-flagged German vessel it apprehended 160 miles off the Israeli coast, on Sunday afternoon, on suspicion that it was carrying weapons headed to Gaza. Thorough overnight inspections of the cargo turned up nothing problematic, and the troops let the ship continue on its way. - http://www.timesofisrael.com/navy-releases-liberian-cargo-ship-after-searches-reveal-no-arms-on-board/ http://www.timesofisrael.com/navy-releases-liberian-cargo-sh... In January the amphibious transport USS San Antonio stopped a Russian-owned cargo ship, the Monchegorsk, in the Red Sea. US intelligence had received a tip that the freighter was carrying weapons exports from Iran – a violation of United Nations sanctions. A US Navy boarding party confirmed the presence of arms. ... As this incident shows, the US Navy and allies have ample experience at interdicting suspect vessels on the high seas. - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/0624/p02s04-usmi.html http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/0624/p02s04-usmi.... So you are right, these are not "just to have a look around." They are being stopped for a reason. Also, these couldn't wait until the ship got into port. In the first case, the ship might have had a nuclear bomb. And I think the coast guards and navies want to continue to be able to stop ships at sea in the future and inspect cargo. Also, the GPS wouldn't be 100ft behind the ship. The antenna needs to be above the surface, which means there would need to be a (visible) cable pull it along, and there would be an extra wake.
fiachamp 13y ago
Two words: surveillance systems + helicopters could probably cover a lot of the most dangerous areas.
cc439 13y ago
The shipping industry already loses about 1 container an hour on average: http://singularityhub.com/2011/04/05/10000-shipping-containers-lost-at-sea-each-year-heres-a-look-at-one-2/ http://singularityhub.com/2011/04/05/10000-shipping-containe... Piracy would have to become incredibly frequent and highly sophisticated to make a noticeable dent in the financials of the shipping industry. There are limits to what pirates can offload and carry home due to the necessity of using fast and/or stealthy ships.
snowwrestler 13y ago
What stops pirates from doing that to manned ships now? Nothing, as your stories indicate. The crews on cargo ships are there to operate the ship, not protect the cargo.
gfodor 13y ago
The crew doesn't prevent cargo theft by force, they prevent cargo theft by acting as a layer of surveillance. It's obvious the eyes of the crew can be replaced by cameras.
WWKong 13y ago
Blow up a couple of those and pirates would learn fast to not come anywhere near.
bjterry 13y ago
I would imagine not every route has many pirates. If the container ship sails from China to California, it's spending most of its time in the middle of the ocean. Just because it won't work everywhere doesn't mean it won't work somewhere.

by lutusp 13y ago

gk1 13y ago

I think that's a solvable problem. As quoted in the article, just make the trouble of stealing cargo more hassle than it's worth. I'm not saying it'd be easy, but it's not the showstopper you make it out to be.

lutusp 13y ago
> As quoted in the article, just make the trouble of stealing cargo more hassle than it's worth. If that were feasible, shipping companies would have done it already. As to piracy, a robot ship represents an added risk, not a reduced one. Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point -- those who robbed Mt. Gox didn't have to risk a face-to-face confrontation with an armed guard. It's the same here. > I'm not saying it'd be easy, but it's not the showstopper you make it out to be. I'll bet that's what the backers of Bitcoin said -- until a week ago.
- baddox 13y ago
  Has the Bitcoin show been stopped? I've been following the Bitcoin community fairly closely, and I must have missed it.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > Has the Bitcoin show been stopped? No, I don't think so, but the risks inherent in virtual currencies should now be obvious to everyone. Bitcoin may recover, but I think in the long term, much better software and transaction protocols will be required than now exist. Remember also that Mt. Gox wasn't the only large online Bitcoin theft: http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitcoins-stolen-unknown-amount/ http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitc...
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
- gk1 13y ago
  > If that were feasible, shipping companies would have done it already. For shipping companies, it's not about feasibility. It's about profits. Thanks to insurance, they can afford to pay a ransom every now-and-then and therefore don't need to make the ships as secure as profits. Having no crew onboard would lower operating costs, leaving them with more money to spend on anti-piracy measures. And even then, they would only do it if the cost of adding said measures is less than the cost of insurance. > Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point That's not really a fair comparison, is it. Bank robbers aren't after ransoms, and neither are the guys who robbed MtGox.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    >> Just look at Internet crime and compare it with old-style bank robberies to see my point ... > That's not really a fair comparison, is it. As a matter of fact, yes, it is. > Bank robbers aren't after ransoms, and neither are the guys who robbed MtGox. It's all about stealing other people's money. You're trying to say that the method one chooses to steal other people's money is more than a detail.

eurleif 13y ago

If there's no crew, why can't you just fill the entire thing with poison gas?

dethstar 13y ago
Some people believe lives are not just something you could take, you know, even if it's not people from the crew.
- baddox 13y ago
  So then what is a crew on a normal ship going to do if pirates board?
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > So then what is a crew on a normal ship going to do if pirates board? You're not thinking this through. The reason pirates can board ships with relative safety is because the operators have realized that if they arm the crews, the pirates will simply kill everyone on board as a precaution. So a decision was made to avoid too much a show of force, because that would only invite retaliation in kind. After a ship has been taken over, that's different -- that's the time for a show of force, but training and arming cargo vessel crews as part-time soldiers was obviously a bad idea.
    - baddox 13y ago
      I don't think you're following the entire path of this comment tree. I realize all and agree with most of those things you said, but they're not immediately relevant. I was responding to dethstar's comment, which indicated that "some people" don't think the lives of people should be taken even if they're attempting to pirate a ship. You seem to recognize that force (and I assume you mean potentially deadly force) should be used against pirates, which is also my view. Dethstar claims that some people dispute this view.
      - lutusp 13y ago

a1a 13y ago

It might still make economical sense to hire a gunship to protect the "droneships" while passing high-risk areas. Besides, take some of the money saved on salaries and use it for foreign aid to countries such as Somalia and you'd have stopped piracy before you know it.

lutusp 13y ago
> take some of the money saved on salaries and use it for foreign aid to countries such as Somalia and you'd have stopped piracy before you know it. No, that certainly won't work. With all respect, it's naive to think that foreign aid can solve the problem of poverty. In many cases it makes the problem worse. Consider the Diem regime in the early 1960s, South Vietnam. Copious American aid made the prior situation much worse, led to large amounts of corruption, and in part contributed to the eventual fall of South Vietnam. Look at foreign aid programs that don't also address political and social issues like basic human rights and reproductive choice for women. They always fail, and many make the original problems worse.
- TeMPOraL 13y ago
  Bill Gates seems to disagree with you on this one: http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/#section=myth-two http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/#section=myth-two
  - nitrogen 13y ago
    Among some circles, disagreement with Bill Gates is a positive signal. In seriousness though, I don't think your link disagrees with lutusp's comment. The Gates Foundation seems to care about human rights and reproductive choice, the lack of which causes aid to fail (as claimed by the parent comment). In other words, I think lutusp is saying that dumping money into an impoverished environment will lead to corruption and more poverty, but more involved approaches that directly liberate the people can work.
  - brc 13y ago
    Bill Gates is pitching to have foreign aid directed through his charities. It certainly would make more sense for the aid to be directed through organizations with runs on the board and a capable organization. I think the parent should probably have said 'direct government-to-government foreign aid usually makes things worse'. Part of the thing Bill Gates is fighting against with his 'myth busting' is the bad reputation foreign aid has got because it goes directly from politician to politician, and not necessarily distributed or managed in accordance with what people know to work.

incision 13y ago

That's where the robot defense system comes in. Lack of crew will greatly simplify the implementation as it can be trained to fire on all humans without concern for friendly fire.

dalke 13y ago
Would it exclaim "Got the humanoid, got the intruder!" when that happens? :) Current maritime law doesn't allow for robot defense systems with lethal force. Consider too what happens if the Coast Guard wants to interdict but the distant operators "accidentally" forget to disable the defense system.
- GVIrish 13y ago
  Memories of ED-209 malfunctions abound. I'd hate to be the guy that has to do maintainenance on a drone ship filled with kill bots.
- Houshalter 13y ago
  It wouldn't necessarily be autonomous but remote controlled. Or have a single manned boat with security forces on it guarding dozens of unmanned ships in a fleet.
  - Perdition 13y ago
    So the pirates jam the radio frequencies for the control signal. Convoys are incredibly inefficient which is why they are only used in war time (it takes days to form a convoy due to loading times). And no security boat can protect hundreds of miles of ocean, which is why piracy is still alive today.
    - phazmatis 13y ago
      So the boat will submerge when it senses trouble. Then we'll get submarine pirates but... The barrier to entry would have expanded sufficiently.

baddox 13y ago

How do these pirates actually unload cargo? Do they actually have a way to unload entire crates (seems unlikely), or do they just break into one crate and fill up a backpack with iPads?

gk1 13y ago
They usually never intend to unload cargo, they just hold ship and/or crew hostage until they're paid a ransom. Hence the claim that without a crew on-board the risk of piracy goes down.
- baddox 13y ago
  I was inquiring specifically about lutusp's comment: > I heard any number of accounts of cargo vessels being boarded by pirates late at night, to steal cargo and slip away undetected by the skeleton crew that shipping operators prefer.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    See my comment above for the answer -- there are a number of low-tech ways to board and loot a cargo ship.
lutusp 13y ago
> How do these pirates actually unload cargo? During my around-the-world solo sail (http://arachnoid.com/sailbook http://arachnoid.com/sailbook), I saw and heard any number of pirate stories. For example, in the Strait of Malacca, pirates will show up after dark in two wooden boats (no radar signature) with a rope slung between them. They stretch the rope across the bow of a passing freighter, which puts a wooden boat on each side of the ship, dragged along with it. Then they climb aboard, break the seals of some cargo containers, steal some electronics or something else easy to to carry off, climb back down into their boats and release the rope. Perfectly simple, low-tech, and because of the small size of modern cargo ship crews, likely to escape the attention of the crew.
- 13y ago

fr0sty 13y ago

Were the thefts you heard about from container ships like this one?: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Eleonora_Maersk_DCT_3.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Eleonora_...

lutusp 13y ago
Yes, in that same class. The bulb on the bow makes it relatively easy to board using two small boats and a rope between them.

GigabyteCoin 13y ago

I doubt a ship made for only robot operators would have any human accessible doors. Pirates may be able to approach the ship, but entering is a different story. Cutting a hole in the side of the ship would be the only option I could see. Same goes for disabling the propulsion system. If there's no cockpit, there's no switch to disable anything.

dalke 13y ago
The Coast Guard won't like it if they can't board and inspect the ship. Have you seen a container ship? The containers are stacked out in the open. There's no need to have a door because there aren't any walls in the way. Cut the antennas, block the GPS signal, and what's the ship supposed to do besides stop?
- GigabyteCoin 13y ago
  You make a good point about coast guard inspections. But all goods could be inspected when they arrive in dock to unload. The coast guard boarding moving ships for inspection I imagine would happen more to tiny fishing boats/speed boats accused of drug smuggling, etc. I doubt they're casually stopping freightliners "just to take a look around". As for blocking the GPS signal, again, you need to know where the GPS is hiding. It could be trailing 100ft behind the boat for all the pirate knows.
  - dalke 13y ago
    Navy SEALs Inspecting Radioactive Ship Off New Jersey - http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/09/12/navy-seals-inspecting-radioactive-ship-off-new-jersey/ http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/09/12/navy-seals-inspectin... On Tuesday November 3, a special Israel Navy force intercepted and boarded the cargo ship "Francop". Some 500 tons of weapons, rockets, and missiles were uncovered aboard the vessel, disguised as civilian cargo and hidden among hundreds of other containers. - http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pages/nava-force-intercepts-Iranian-weapon-ship-4-Nov-2009.aspx http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pa... Greece intercepts mystery ship with 20,000 Kalashnikovs onboard - http://rt.com/news/greek-seize-ship-kalashnikov-503/ http://rt.com/news/greek-seize-ship-kalashnikov-503/ The Israeli navy released Monday afternoon the HMS Beethoven, a Liberian-flagged German vessel it apprehended 160 miles off the Israeli coast, on Sunday afternoon, on suspicion that it was carrying weapons headed to Gaza. Thorough overnight inspections of the cargo turned up nothing problematic, and the troops let the ship continue on its way. - http://www.timesofisrael.com/navy-releases-liberian-cargo-ship-after-searches-reveal-no-arms-on-board/ http://www.timesofisrael.com/navy-releases-liberian-cargo-sh... In January the amphibious transport USS San Antonio stopped a Russian-owned cargo ship, the Monchegorsk, in the Red Sea. US intelligence had received a tip that the freighter was carrying weapons exports from Iran – a violation of United Nations sanctions. A US Navy boarding party confirmed the presence of arms. ... As this incident shows, the US Navy and allies have ample experience at interdicting suspect vessels on the high seas. - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/0624/p02s04-usmi.html http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/0624/p02s04-usmi.... So you are right, these are not "just to have a look around." They are being stopped for a reason. Also, these couldn't wait until the ship got into port. In the first case, the ship might have had a nuclear bomb. And I think the coast guards and navies want to continue to be able to stop ships at sea in the future and inspect cargo. Also, the GPS wouldn't be 100ft behind the ship. The antenna needs to be above the surface, which means there would need to be a (visible) cable pull it along, and there would be an extra wake.

fiachamp 13y ago

Two words: surveillance systems + helicopters could probably cover a lot of the most dangerous areas.

cc439 13y ago

The shipping industry already loses about 1 container an hour on average: http://singularityhub.com/2011/04/05/10000-shipping-containers-lost-at-sea-each-year-heres-a-look-at-one-2/ http://singularityhub.com/2011/04/05/10000-shipping-containe... Piracy would have to become incredibly frequent and highly sophisticated to make a noticeable dent in the financials of the shipping industry. There are limits to what pirates can offload and carry home due to the necessity of using fast and/or stealthy ships.

snowwrestler 13y ago

What stops pirates from doing that to manned ships now? Nothing, as your stories indicate. The crews on cargo ships are there to operate the ship, not protect the cargo.

gfodor 13y ago

The crew doesn't prevent cargo theft by force, they prevent cargo theft by acting as a layer of surveillance. It's obvious the eyes of the crew can be replaced by cameras.

WWKong 13y ago

Blow up a couple of those and pirates would learn fast to not come anywhere near.

bjterry 13y ago

I would imagine not every route has many pirates. If the container ship sails from China to California, it's spending most of its time in the middle of the ocean. Just because it won't work everywhere doesn't mean it won't work somewhere.