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

Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#71

Post by ssizn »

superchroma wrote: post #53
dukeofdoom wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fishing would be like banning commercial chicken. A huge loss of a major cheap source of protein, and nothing to replace it with.

That's too bad. Nobody told people to have all those mouths to feed. The oceans are overfished and heavily polluted and people need the ocean to survive. If people rely on fucking up the ocean, we're all in trouble.

Humans > Environment.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#72

Post by anon84873628 »

Guthur wrote: post #57
maxbond wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring the snark, it's an interesting point and I'm not in favor of using violence to achieve any ends. Not interested in waiting around to die because some large fishing interests are structurally incapable of behaving responsibly, either, though. Just as I reject that our only options are to either screw over fishing communities or do nothing, I reject that our only alternatives are violence or doing nothing. I d…

Not you nor anyone else has any proof of any collapse, it is hyperbolic nonsense. The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.

I'm guessing anything you don't agree with is considered ideology driven?

You seem unfamiliar with the mathematics of game theory or multi-agent coordination problems. The only way to avoid these traps (overfishing is literally a textbook example) is to grant regulatory authority to some overarching entity, like a government. That's not the same as tyranny.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#73

Post by dr_dshiv »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #26
jacknews wrote: post #4

Commercial fishing at sea should be banned IMHO. It's unsustainable, and even if quotas could make it sustainable, they are all but unenforceable.

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fishing would be like banning commercial chicken. A huge loss of a major cheap source of protein, and nothing to replace it with.

Here is a source of sustainable cheap protein! It is hard to compete with the commodity price of fish meal but we are very close to doing so. (I know, we are running a maggot farm, don’t judge) Inputs are based on restaurant food waste. Also looking for sources of cheap starch if you know any.

Displacing fish meal is a major priority and motivation for this startup.

Comments welcome:

https://www.getprotyn.com/

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#74

Post by Guthur »

anon84873628 wrote: post #72
Guthur wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not you nor anyone else has any proof of any collapse, it is hyperbolic nonsense. The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.

I'm guessing anything you don't agree with is considered ideology driven? You seem unfamiliar with the mathematics of game theory or multi-agent coordination problems. The only way to avoid these traps (overfishing is literally a textbook example) is to grant regulatory authority to some overarching entity, like a government. That's not the same as tyranny.

No, the problem is that you are repeating the same nonsense that has been said for literally decades. So at this stage we can't agree there is actually a problem. If species go extinct that is not actually in my mind a problem that justifies a central solution.

I am tired of being robbed blind of my free will and wealth by these huge central planning bureaucracies. None of us are smart enough to have that much control.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#75

Post by rootlocus »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #73
dukeofdoom wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fishing would be like banning commercial chicken. A huge loss of a major cheap source of protein, and nothing to replace it with.

Here is a source of sustainable cheap protein! It is hard to compete with the commodity price of fish meal but we are very close to doing so. (I know, we are running a maggot farm, don’t judge) Inputs are based on restaurant food waste. Also looking for sources of cheap starch if you know any. Displacing fish meal is a major priority and motivation for this startup. Comments welcome: https://www.getprotyn.com/

Sounds like it has lots of benefits and no downsides, which begs more research. The website however seems to have a leftover placeholder text under "Our bugs are bettering the world" > "Disease Free":

That wasn't real text. Just holding some space here. Real text is going to be awesome.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#76

Post by rootlocus »

Guthur wrote: post #57
maxbond wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring the snark, it's an interesting point and I'm not in favor of using violence to achieve any ends. Not interested in waiting around to die because some large fishing interests are structurally incapable of behaving responsibly, either, though. Just as I reject that our only options are to either screw over fishing communities or do nothing, I reject that our only alternatives are violence or doing nothing. I d…

Not you nor anyone else has any proof of any collapse, it is hyperbolic nonsense. The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.

> The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.

There's always someone who disagrees with someone else's world view, that doesn't make it tyranny.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#77

Post by yieldcrv »

m00x wrote: post #30
jacknews wrote: post #4

Commercial fishing at sea should be banned IMHO. It's unsustainable, and even if quotas could make it sustainable, they are all but unenforceable.

I used to live in a lobster/crab fishing town near the Atlantic. Crab fishermen would meet First Nations people halfway to sell them the crabs that were over quota at a cheaper price since they don't have a quota, and they would sell it bootleg at the reserves. We used to go down and buy 12 lobsters for $40 when I was a kid (20 years ago). It was the best deal ever. When I left town, the fishermen started attacking F…

Huh never heard the precolonial societies on the Atlantic side referred to as First Nations

Does all of Canada use that terminology now?

I think that term only bleeds over across the border into the US in the Pacific Northwest, since some tribes there overlap borders and have a special cross border ID that allows employment (some cross border tribes in New England but theyre just split in two)

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#78

Post by tremon »

sunsunsunsun wrote: post #17
neodypsis wrote: post #12

Is anybody here working on remote sensing applications for identifying illegal fishing?

Yep, I work for and there are several companies working on this problem. I specifically work for a company creating USVs to fight the issue on the water but there are others working on solutions from the air and space.

USVs

unmanned submarine vehicle?

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#79

Post by spookierookie »

skrebbel wrote: post #70
spookierookie wrote: post #65

So, everybody knows that almost certainly the crew killed him, and the crew and their company and their vessel just walks? And that keeps happening... I'd propose in any subsequent event of a missing observer captain does time, ship seized, company closed and that's done even before police starting asking questions. I bet there wouldn't be any missing observer after that.

I’ll never understand how passionately people will argue for a society without any form of civic justice, just because they’re angry about something they read on the internet. Just lock random people up without due process! That’ll teach them!

Does what happened seem just to you? That form of passion that you disapprove comes from failing to serve justice in the first place. Do you have any better proposal than to just keep going like this and be sorry for the observers that end up at the bottom of the sea? If yes I'm eager to hear about it.

Also, unless I'm very rusty with the legal system, if you're the captain, by definition you're responsible for anyone on board. Coming back to port with anyone missing should be a HUGE problem for you. I don't get that impression here.

Re: Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared

#80

Post by goodpoint »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #26
jacknews wrote: post #4

Commercial fishing at sea should be banned IMHO. It's unsustainable, and even if quotas could make it sustainable, they are all but unenforceable.

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fishing would be like banning commercial chicken. A huge loss of a major cheap source of protein, and nothing to replace it with.

> Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat

"but"? That's a non-sequitur. If we run out of fish there's no fish to eat.

Post reply on HN