Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 320 posts

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#111

Post by matt4077 »

idlewords wrote: post #93
benzofuran wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the proper training and experience, this is an academically rewarding sport / hobby, and is quite safe - still less so than normal open water diving but not the death trap that it seems. The NSS-CDS ( http://nsscds.org ) keeps accident analysis articles on hand (only seems like older ones are available on the website right now, dead tree is still the boss in this arena) covering these. Similarly though, there's…

A similar trough exists in general aviation—accident rates are markedly higher for somewhat experienced pilots than for beginners. The consensus among pilots seems to be that you are most dangerous between the time you think you know what you're doing, and the time you survive your first big scare. There's probably a good lesson here for computer programmers...

I seem to remember hearing the same about drivers. Might have been for my country (Germany) specifically, where the minimum age for a license 18. If you get your license at 16, you're still in the upwards swing on risk-taking behaviour, which might drown out all other statistical signals.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#112

Post by jng »

pdonis wrote: post #107
wfunction wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the complaint was that the parent had a young child, not merely a child. Without actually taking a stance on the topic, it seems quite a reasonable argument that, while you have a young child, you shouldn't actively go around risking your life -- they're your dependents, i.e. it's not just your life you're messing around with. When they stop being your dependents, do whatever you want, it's just your life now…

> it seems quite a reasonable argument that, while you have a young child, you shouldn't actively go around risking your life -- they're your dependents That's an argument for having life insurance; it's not necessarily an argument for not taking risks.

Money is not the only thing a father needs to be around to provide to his kids, at least not in a desirable case.

And yes, I know many cases are a lot less than desirable.

(When did people start to think money is a good substitute for everything?)

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#113

Post by pdonis »

Chris2048 wrote: post #56
balls187 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a soldier, it's their duty. For the diver in the story, it was his hobby. He'd been doing it for 24 years, so his tolerance for risk wrt cave diving is different than what you and I perceive--thus I don't blame him at all.

> For a soldier, it's their duty They accept that duty though, so it's the same thing - instead of "is it ok for a soldier to go to war" it's "is it ok to become a soldier". > his tolerance for risk wrt cave diving is different than what you and I perceive What does this mean?

> They accept that duty though, so it's the same thing - instead of "is it ok for a soldier to go to war" it's "is it ok to become a soldier".

But if it's not ok to become a soldier if you have kids, that severely limits who can be a soldier. (For example, many soldiers get married and start families during their careers as soldiers. Should they instantly get discharged if that happens? Taken off all possibly dangerous duties?) That doesn't seem like a good idea for society as a whole, since it makes being a soldier a much less attractive career, and any society needs soldiers to defend it.

The argument with cave diving is at least somewhat stronger, since I don't see any pressing need for society as a whole to have a particular number of cave divers, or for cave diving to be an attractive career.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#114

Post by betenoire »

Chris2048 wrote: post #108
betenoire wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a longer answer, but I'll shorten it to: it's not about the adrenaline fix. At some point, your hobbies/passions (hopefully) become an integral part of who you are. Especially ones like this with expertise and life-long pursuits. The rest is balancing act that you hope to get right.

> become an integral part of who you are You can say that about anything. Smoking, alcohol, racism, leftism ( jk :-D ) But is identity investment in something life-risking really compatible with reasonable parenting? that's the question.

That's the balancing part, no? Nothing is risk-free, and the implied dichotomy is misleading. You can be a wreckless fool without the dangerous hobbies.

Also implied is that we can even agree what "reasonable parenting" means.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#115

Post by Chris2048 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #110
Chris2048 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> become an integral part of who you are You can say that about anything. Smoking, alcohol, racism, leftism ( jk :-D ) But is identity investment in something life-risking really compatible with reasonable parenting? that's the question.

> But is identity investment in something life-risking really compatible with reasonable parenting? Every human activity is life-risking (as is inactivity.)

In what sense? In that some, possibly trivial, risk is involved?

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#116

Post by pdonis »

wfunction wrote: post #109
pdonis wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems quite a reasonable argument that, while you have a young child, you shouldn't actively go around risking your life -- they're your dependents That's an argument for having life insurance; it's not necessarily an argument for not taking risks.

>> it seems quite a reasonable argument that, while you have a young child, you shouldn't actively go around risking your life -- they're your dependents > That's an argument for having life insurance; it's not necessarily an argument for not taking risks. Yeah, because fathers can be replaced with money and children wouldn't feel a thing.

> because fathers can be replaced with money and children wouldn't feel a thing.

That's not what I said. What I said was that it's not necessarily an argument for not taking risks. You have to balance the risk against the potential cost. That is perfectly compatible with there being a cost that can't be made good with money. And it's also perfectly compatible with minimizing the cost--yes, you can't replace a father with money, but you can make the impact as bearable as possible by ensuring that money is not a problem.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#117

Post by pdonis »

jng wrote: post #112
pdonis wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems quite a reasonable argument that, while you have a young child, you shouldn't actively go around risking your life -- they're your dependents That's an argument for having life insurance; it's not necessarily an argument for not taking risks.

Money is not the only thing a father needs to be around to provide to his kids, at least not in a desirable case. And yes, I know many cases are a lot less than desirable. (When did people start to think money is a good substitute for everything?)

> Money is not the only thing a father needs to be around to provide to his kids

I didn't say it was. See my response to wfunction.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#118

Post by benzofuran »

klipt wrote: post #22
curtis wrote: post #6

Cave diving is one of those things that I am happy to only experience vicariously through the stories of others.

If I got an urge to map caves as a hobby ... I'd rather design robots to do it. At least that way failures aren't fatal.

That's Bill Stone's entire reason for existing these days - check these out:

http://stoneaerospace.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEPTHX

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENDURANCE

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#119

Post by wfunction »

nvahalik wrote: post #57
Chris2048 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rather than never take any big risks With kids at home? specifically ?! There are ways to enjoy life, or take "risks", that do not involve mortal danger. > Do we need to look down upon astronauts who have children? What about pilots? .. Someone who commutes .. in a car that has a poor safety rating? Are those as dangerous? If so, then yes, I think so. > People who travel for work for days or weeks at a time? People…

> There are ways to enjoy life, or take "risks", that do not involve mortal danger. Depends on how you look at it. We are fragile creatures and the world is a fairly dangerous place. People die every day driving cars, riding bikes, going for walks—doing things far more mundane than cave-diving.

Yeah, except it's kinda hard to find jobs/stores/daily-places-that-you-need-to-go that don't require transportation on the road, but it's kind of easy to find jobs/stores that don't require going into underwater caves or jumping off cliffs/airplanes or the like. If only one out of thousands of people ever needed to drive on the road, we'd probably criticize them too. The entire argument is so ridiculous that I can't even believe I have to lay it out like this.

Re: Two days in an underwater cave running out of oxygen

#120

Post by macspoofing »

dragonwriter wrote: post #74
j9461701 wrote: post #33

I might be speaking out of line, but taking on these kinds of risks with young children at home seems kind of selfish. The fact that he went back into the same cave that nearly killed him only a month later...almost as if to say: "I would rather my kids grow up without a Dad than live without my adrenaline fix" I am neither a father or a cave diver though, so I might be missing a piece of the puzzle. Would either gro…

> I might be speaking out of line, but taking on these kinds of risks with young children at home seems kind of selfish. People die. A key responsibility of being a parent is to make sure arrangements are made for you children should you die. I suppose whether this risk is warranted involves some complex calculus taking, among it's many inputs, the quality of arrangements that the parent has made, the actual mathemat…

>A key responsibility of being a parent is to make sure arrangements are made for you children should you die.

Could you even get life insurance if you engage in high-risk activities?

Post reply on HN