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

Underwater ears everywhere

computer.rip

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#111

Post by andrewaylett »

scotty79 wrote: post #103

And despite all those ears they let newsagencies milk the suspense about the fate of Titan submersible for days.

Well, that's sort of the point of the article -- they knew they'd heard something, they didn't know for sure what that noise meant, though. So they (probably, we infer from how quickly the wreckage was found) directed the rescue team to the right place to see what happened, rather than speculating.

It would have been a lot worse if they'd announced that they heard noises that were consistent with an implosion but it turned out that wasn't what had happened.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#113

Post by bee_rider »

dundarious wrote: post #63

Related but off topic (so I could understand being flagged, etc.), but in all likelihood, these capabilities could say a lot about what happened surrounding the Nord Stream pipeline explosions. I think it's a reasonable assumption that the US has these detectors beyond the borders of the US -- I've seen others claim as much: https://www.thenation.com/article/world/nord-stream-pipeline...

Sonar would tell you that there was a boat down there, but not necessarily who was driving it, right?

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#114

Post by _Algernon_ »

ProAm wrote: post #68
SkyMarshal wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None, why? Are paywalled articles written in the traditional way since they already have a revenue source and don’t need to addict people?

So you dont pay for any of it and then complain this is what they have to do to get views and clicks. Chicken meet egg, egg meet chicken, pot meet kettle.

If I start paying for it today, they wont magically start writing proper articles again.

The news media has gotten themselves stuck in a bad Nash equilibrium. Guilting indiviudals into paying wont change that. Systemic change is required.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#115

Post by AdamN »

ProAm wrote: post #68
SkyMarshal wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None, why? Are paywalled articles written in the traditional way since they already have a revenue source and don’t need to addict people?

So you dont pay for any of it and then complain this is what they have to do to get views and clicks. Chicken meet egg, egg meet chicken, pot meet kettle.

I pay about $2k/yr for news sites and the variability is high even for paid sites. Check out the WSJ Editorial pages if you want to observe diminished writing ability.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#116

Post by TeMPOraL »

ProAm wrote: post #68
SkyMarshal wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None, why? Are paywalled articles written in the traditional way since they already have a revenue source and don’t need to addict people?

So you dont pay for any of it and then complain this is what they have to do to get views and clicks. Chicken meet egg, egg meet chicken, pot meet kettle.

> this is what they have to do

They could always close the shop too.

"We need to keep the revenue coming in these changing times" is not a justification for descending deeper and deeper into immoral and anti-social behavior.

Not to mention, the way market economy works means that even if we'd all start paying for shitty pseudo-journalism today, the influx of money will not make them climb back out of the ethical/quality hole - it'll only validate getting worse as a growth model.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#117

Post by IggleSniggle »

jcrawfordor wrote: post #38
doubledad222 wrote: post #22

> this writing is so clear and good > Today, IUSS automatically detects and classifies both submarines and wales. Do the British know ?

I am proud to say I noticed that one about two minutes before I saw your comment. It's not that I never copy edit, I just usually don't do it until two days later.

See, if you edit THEN copy, you'll get your corrections where you want them. /s

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#118

Post by wossab »

defrost wrote: post #96
wossab wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't just a sunk craft. They sunk a carrier. That's painful. Your wikipedia entry is kind of weird, since it's about Australia and there are no Dutch ships in the list for the last century or so.

Australia has 'sunk' USS carriers in war games also - there are entire books written about how carriers are hard to defend in modern warfare - they're painful to lose but (shhh, don't tell anyone) relativey easy targets in all manner of ways. The wikipedia entry is about 1400+ ships that were mostly Dutch - from the days of the Dutch East Indies and Spice trades. It's of interest as that coast was one of the main dri…

While your post is informative, it's kind of disingenuous to claim a link between two phenomena when there is none, seemingly because you needed to say something bad about Dutch ships in some way. It's a shame really, because it detracts from the quality of your other links.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#119

Post by TeMPOraL »

XorNot wrote: post #71
fbdab103 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Joe Internet-Commentator looks at that and says "oh it was totally instant, probably". Kind of, yeah. There is a good timeline on when the ship was in water, when an event would have occurred, plus a very narrow geographical search area. That is significantly more information than is ever available when chasing ghost submarines. It is difficult for me to imagine some bored analyst did not pop open a graph of activit…

Sure, but literally everything they're looking at is classified capability or may include classified capability. They don't have permission to just post a hot-take on Twitter, and definitely don't have permission to unilaterally release supporting data. All of that has to run through the chain of command and declassification process.

Adding another thing of interest for Bill the Hostile Power Submarine Commander - do the Navy sonar analysts stick to protocol, or are they neglectful of their duty to the point of posting hot takes on Twitter "just because" it's a civilian matter that's trending on social media?

On that note, I wonder if they have the "loose tweets sink fleets" poster put up somewhere. Apparently, Royal Navy did this officially[0] (I may be wrong, but I thought this was an Internet meme before the official poster).

--

[0] - https://www.businessinsider.com/royal-navy-updates-loose-lip...

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#120

Post by 542458 »

tommiegannert wrote: post #94

Reminded me of this story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba%E2%80%93Kongsberg_scan... Toshiba wasn't allowed to export a 9-axis (C)NC-machine to the Soviet union, because it could (and would) be used to create ultra-silent submarine props, in the 80s. Asianometry video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaRyqAVIkwI

It’s kinda wild that the two executives committed fraud to export weapons technology to a major military adversary in contradiction of international agreement… and ended up with 10 and 12 month sentences. That seems really light to me!
Post reply on HN