81–90 of 202 posts
File this under the category "people are f-bomb-ing idiots". I wouldn't be surprised if social media was spreading this technique as successful way to fish.
the coral is a tragedy of the commons things; it's a sweet deal for lazy fisherman.
It’s hard to believe this is real. Destroying a vibrant ecosystem for a one-time catch is so selfish and shortsighted it’s amazing to me that anyone would seriously consider doing it.
"With a bomb dropped once every 62 minutes, the equivalent of three football fields of reef are destroyed each year, according to Williams." That doesn't sound right.
I love the American measurement units. How many bald eagles of explosives are needed to destroy three football fields worth of reef?
advanced question for the college types: how many if you supersize it?
File this under the category "people are f-bomb-ing idiots". I wouldn't be surprised if social media was spreading this technique as successful way to fish.
Fishermen were doing this in Indonesia decades ago. Pretty well known technique.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My first encounter with the concept of bomb fishing was the Shapoklyak episode of the soviet cartoon Cheburashka, produced in the 70s. It's been around.
Yeah it’s been around for a while but it’s been at the individual level not at the commercial scale which makes the practice way worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Casting a net is actually one of the less sustainable ways to fish.
I am starting to see this lazy response pattern on HN. Someone makes a reasonable comment, then a responder pops-up like a whack-a-mole to say little more than: "That's not true." or "That's still bad." ... while offering no evidence to their claim, nor any reasonable alternative. I think that it adds so little to the conversation. And specific to the comment, they even used the Holy Grail of annoying Internet argume…
File this under the category "people are f-bomb-ing idiots". I wouldn't be surprised if social media was spreading this technique as successful way to fish.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am starting to see this lazy response pattern on HN. Someone makes a reasonable comment, then a responder pops-up like a whack-a-mole to say little more than: "That's not true." or "That's still bad." ... while offering no evidence to their claim, nor any reasonable alternative. I think that it adds so little to the conversation. And specific to the comment, they even used the Holy Grail of annoying Internet argume…
"You say we should improve society yet participate in it, curious"
It’s hard to believe this is real. Destroying a vibrant ecosystem for a one-time catch is so selfish and shortsighted it’s amazing to me that anyone would seriously consider doing it.
People will do literally anything if they are hungry enough.
