For me this is a complicated example with regard to regulation. I agree it's a reminder of why it can be a good thing but am not sure how I feel about it as an example of the need for regulation.
I'm outraged at OceanGate and feel as if the CEO and the company were grossly irresponsible. Any wrongful death lawsuits would be more than appropriate.
On the other hand, OceanGate and its CEO were very open about not seeking certification or classing. They didn't try to hide it. Elsewhere on HN now there's a post to an OceanGate blog page arguing about why they didn't seek certification.
So why would anyone sign up for anything involving that submersible? If you were going to go on a mission to the bottom of the ocean, wouldn't you do a lot of research? Wouldn't you demand it be third-party certified if that is industry practice?
I guess there's regulation and then there's regulation, so it's possible that international regulations could be codified to just formalize what is considered standard practice (that is, classing the vessel by an appropriate third party). But I worry that whenever regulations are drafted, they start to become the sort of monster the OceanGate CEO was falsely suggesting.
I'm not sure what I'm saying, because I'm not really even meaning to argue against this as being a good example of where there should maybe regulations. It probably is. But I could also envision this as maybe a case where the reminder is to take risks seriously and be deeply skeptical of persons and institutions not willing to have their work scrutinized by independent bodies.
I do have family who work in this specific area professionally; I haven't spoken to them yet about the incident but I suspect they would see this more as a case of gross negligence and irresponsibility rather than as an area in need of heavy regulation, but I could be wrong. As I think of it, from what I know from their professional experiences, there should have been a lot of red flags that I suspect will come to light in the near future.
Maybe I'm biased in that regard, because everyone I know doing oceanic and deep sea work have been deeply enmeshed in all things ocean and marine their entire lives, and probably would be aware of all these issues. My guess is this family member would have thought it irresponsible to bring those particular passengers anywhere in the deep sea in the first place, on any vessel.
In that regard it would be good to see this turn into some reflection on what it means about society that real world wisdom, expertise, and skills are somehow superceded by monetary net worth. Has it always been this way?
I feel as if society is trapped in some hall of mirrors maze, between fake and real expertise, and worthless and essential certifications and regulations. I'm not sure what's worse: OceanGate CEO Rush's dangerous and absurd arguments against certification, or the fact that his arguments resonate enough as truth with ostensibly successful individuals, that they can be conned by them.