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

Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

supplychainbrain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–159 of 159 posts

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#151

Post by dragontamer »

walleeee wrote: post #149
dragontamer wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you are aware of the term "Great Game". But it refers to a particular philosophy which has been dead since the early 1900s. The "Great Game" was a huge reason why WW1 broke out. Back then, social Darwinism was considered a good thing. To win a war and prove that you're superior was honorable. Imperialism was reaching its highest points. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game Under the "Great Gam…

If there is no longer any desire among the democracies of the world to war against rival nations, why have the leading democratic power and its allies been involved in constant covert and overt warfare for the better part of the last century? Why are we talking about "winning" the next century if, as you allege, democracy has superseded geopolitical competition? We may affect more opposition to war in the present day…

I don't think you understand the terms I'm using. Or the history behind these terms. It sounds like you have a bone to pick with somebody, and I'm not interested in being your punching bag.

Social Darwinism is a mostly dead philosophy. There are some radical subgroups who push social Darwinism today, but its well accepted to be a "dead" philosophy and a terrible one at that. Nonetheless, the awful philosophy of Social Darwinism (and "Great Game") was clearly evident throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s. So these philosophies have huge cultural significance to the time period being discussed.

My point, with regards to the original post, is that the "mercantilist peace theory" was overridden by 1900s "Great Game" and "Social Darwinism" philosophies. There were mercantilist peace theorists back then, but they were NOT the ones in power (and they were EXTREMELY wrong about the nature of trade and peace... as the 1910s came about and war broke out between trade partners).

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#152

Post by bkor »

Tabular-Iceberg wrote: post #114
danielovichdk wrote: post #100

There are very big differences in captain papers around the world. It's a very know fact that e.g Mærsk has changed their top tier crew from being Danish to chineese, indian, phillipine etc. I am only implying that education might be part of it.

Forged certificates is indeed a problem in the latter countries, but whether Danish, Chinese, Indian or Filipino, they're all told by a computer where to put each container. Some blame may lie with those who tell the computer how tall it should stack the containers, but another big problem in shipping is that stevedores in many ports simply can't be bothered to secure the cargo according to the instructions. Deck off…

> Some blame may lie with those who tell the computer how tall it should stack the containers

Computers do NOT make the stowage layout. The stowage layout is the responsibility of stowage planners. The captain of the ship has final say. There are various computer programs that assist with the stowage layout. However, they are _not_ sufficient. If you'd take out the stowage planner the shipping company would have a lot of additional costs. These programs do help to check for loads of problems, plus the initial inefficient stowage plan.

How tall something is stacked is too simplistic. What matters is that it isn't stacked as a box. Further, certain twist locks cannot handle too much wind.

Source: used to sit next to a stowage planner, who'd be in the office around 1x/month. The planner mostly talked during these visits.

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#153

Post by walleeee »

dragontamer wrote: post #151
walleeee wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is no longer any desire among the democracies of the world to war against rival nations, why have the leading democratic power and its allies been involved in constant covert and overt warfare for the better part of the last century? Why are we talking about "winning" the next century if, as you allege, democracy has superseded geopolitical competition? We may affect more opposition to war in the present day…

I don't think you understand the terms I'm using. Or the history behind these terms. It sounds like you have a bone to pick with somebody, and I'm not interested in being your punching bag. Social Darwinism is a mostly dead philosophy. There are some radical subgroups who push social Darwinism today, but its well accepted to be a "dead" philosophy and a terrible one at that. Nonetheless, the awful philosophy of Socia…

In the original post you state

> For now, it seems like DEMOCRACY is the best thing to prevent wars.

I'm not interested in throwing punches, however I don't think your claim is coherent

Twice now you respond with a loosely related objection about the definitions of terms used to describe 20th century philosophy and geopolitics

You claim a certain locus of power is best able to prevent war- I point out that this same power has been at war across the globe, in some form or another, for almost a century- is this not a contradiction you see fit to address?

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#154

Post by dragontamer »

walleeee wrote: post #153
dragontamer wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you understand the terms I'm using. Or the history behind these terms. It sounds like you have a bone to pick with somebody, and I'm not interested in being your punching bag. Social Darwinism is a mostly dead philosophy. There are some radical subgroups who push social Darwinism today, but its well accepted to be a "dead" philosophy and a terrible one at that. Nonetheless, the awful philosophy of Socia…

In the original post you state > For now, it seems like DEMOCRACY is the best thing to prevent wars. I'm not interested in throwing punches, however I don't think your claim is coherent Twice now you respond with a loosely related objection about the definitions of terms used to describe 20th century philosophy and geopolitics You claim a certain locus of power is best able to prevent war- I point out that this same…

I've twice clarified what the central thesis of my post was, and you've now twice ignored my clarifications.

The democracy point is a side-point. But if you're interested in it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_peace_theory

My main point is:

1. Trade is NOT a useful deterrent for war.

2. We have a (seemingly) superior recipe for peace: the Democracy Peace Theory. I don't think its perfect, but its a superior theory to the Trade-Peace Theory.

If you disagree with #2, that's fine. It doesn't change the fact that its a well regarded theory of peace. Either way, it doesn't really change my #1 point about the Trade-Peace Theory seemingly being busted.

-------------

The point is that democracies do not go to war WITH OTHER DEMOCRACIES. That's the democracy peace theory, and so far it has held true.

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#155

Post by walleeee »

dragontamer wrote: post #154
walleeee wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the original post you state > For now, it seems like DEMOCRACY is the best thing to prevent wars. I'm not interested in throwing punches, however I don't think your claim is coherent Twice now you respond with a loosely related objection about the definitions of terms used to describe 20th century philosophy and geopolitics You claim a certain locus of power is best able to prevent war- I point out that this same…

I've twice clarified what the central thesis of my post was, and you've now twice ignored my clarifications. The democracy point is a side-point. But if you're interested in it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_peace_theory My main point is: 1. Trade is NOT a useful deterrent for war. 2. We have a (seemingly) superior recipe for peace: the Democracy Peace Theory. I don't think its perfect, but its a superior…

I don't dispute your point about the Trade-Peace theory, friend.

Respectfully, since you affirm your convictions re: #2, my goal here is to get you to think critically about why "democratic" nations do not go to war with one another, and whether it may be helpful to consider theories of war which do not so transparently "take a side" in present-day geopolitics, and which can account for decades of warfare waged by democracies

If a "recipe for peace" permits its favored system of governance to war with rival systems for political and economic dominance, perhaps it's not really a comprehensive theory of war and peace

Perhaps it's more about justifying "democracy"

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#156

Post by Scoundreller »

ineedasername wrote: post #45
donw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've taken an interest in learning more about both the history of logistics, as well as modern practices. Any more links (books or otherwise) you could share?

There's been a fair bit written about how Walmart leveraged incredible logistics to achieve its retail dominance, not unlike Amazon doing the same in the online world. I've also come across interesting work on how Dell helped change consumer computing with Just in Time supply chains.

Kinda makes you wonder if Dell (or Gateway?) could have become Amazon as they sold people stuff direct, possibly their first web browser, and never put two and two together about what else could be done with that beyond their next computer.

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#157

Post by Scoundreller »

thehappypm wrote: post #137
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #96

Intermodal shipping containers are arguable the most significant technology of the 20th century. They did more to improve worldwide standard of living, than any other advancement. Including medical.

A surprisingly huge leap forward for the world was air conditioning. Singapore's founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, said it was essential for his country's development. Without AC a huge swath of the world would still be seen by the West as this uninhabitable, uncivilized jungle.

And made sure it was installed in every government building. Otherwise productivity would suffer.

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#158

Post by ImprovedSilence »

Syonyk wrote: post #19
kingvash wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a valve that scuttles them after a few hours otherwise they are a big hazard for other boats

My container (used for land-based storage) has obviously seen travel, and has nothing beyond a couple corner air vents. None of the other containers I'm familiar without here (they're quite popular for storage) have anything of the sort. That valve is a nice idea, but doesn't really exist in most of the fleet of containers on the ocean. They are, indeed, a hazard for other boats, though they generally won't "lurk bel…

>> has nothing beyond a couple corner air vents.

Perhaps the perpetually open two way valves of your container are obsolete?

Re: Shipping containers are falling overboard at a rapid rate

#159

Post by Tabular-Iceberg »

bkor wrote: post #152
Tabular-Iceberg wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forged certificates is indeed a problem in the latter countries, but whether Danish, Chinese, Indian or Filipino, they're all told by a computer where to put each container. Some blame may lie with those who tell the computer how tall it should stack the containers, but another big problem in shipping is that stevedores in many ports simply can't be bothered to secure the cargo according to the instructions. Deck off…

> Some blame may lie with those who tell the computer how tall it should stack the containers Computers do NOT make the stowage layout. The stowage layout is the responsibility of stowage planners. The captain of the ship has final say. There are various computer programs that assist with the stowage layout. However, they are _not_ sufficient. If you'd take out the stowage planner the shipping company would have a lo…

I agree with everything you say.

>Computers do NOT make the stowage layout. The stowage layout is the responsibility of stowage planners.

Yes, that's what I meant by "those who tell the computer..."

>how tall something is stacked is too simplistic.

And that's why I went on to expand on the dynamics of timetables, third party contractors and the correct execution of lashing instructions.

It's true that the captain has the final say, but realistically for large ships and the combinatorial explosion that comes with them the captain and his deck officers simply doesn't have time to check and correct the work of either the stowage planners or the stevedores. Even if they are all western Europeans and Americans with genuine documents.

Post reply on HN