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

161–170 of 179 posts

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#161

Post by Exoristos »

autokad wrote: post #155
efitz wrote: post #109

> It is unwise, in the course of a search and rescue operation, to report that you think the vessel was irrecoverably lost. I made this point several times on social media during the Titan incident but it fell on deaf ears; it seemed crazy to me that people were accusing the US Navy of some nefarious cover-up regarding possible acoustic detection of implosion. Anyone who’s ever worked with any type of signal analysis…

I'd rather the Navy be pretty sure they were dead and tell me, instead of keeping it to themselves just because they might be wrong. No one was saying don't look, people were annoyed they pretended they knew nothing when they where 99% sure the sub imploded.

Everyone was 99% sure. The Navy was just being discreet and staying committed to the search, which no doubt is protocol.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#162

Post by aidenn0 »

AlbertCory wrote: post #160
aidenn0 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he was using MF and HF for most of his work, but I'm not sure[1]. The story about discovering higher frequencies remove the need for longer antennas lat in his career seems garbled since the he discovered early on that longer antennas allowed for longer distance communication. 1: His first claimed transatlantic transmissions were definitely MF.

Wikipedia says he was using "pulses" instead of "continuous wave" which we now use. So maybe the question about "frequency" doesn't even apply? idk

Properly it was dampened waves. Pulses go into the antenna, but the antenna is resonant, so waves go out. A bit like hitting a tuning fork. Later on he used RLC resonant circuits for the same effect.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#163

Post by Exoristos »

Eisenstein wrote: post #137
romwell wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The country that issued the sentence is the same country that profited off of the exports and whose government is heavily involved in business deals[1]... so yeah. Also, the punishment would be not to the executives, but to the company involved (Toshiba) and imposed externally. However: >In response to the affair, Toshiba carried out lobbying activities in Congress between 1987 and 1989 to ease the sanctions. The amo…

You know, lobbying wouldn't be so bad if our government officials just ignored them when they were advocating against the public interest.

Found the lobbyist.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#164

Post by xp84 »

542458 wrote: post #120
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!

Right? This seems like close to Light Treason territory to me.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#165

Post by Eisenstein »

Exoristos wrote: post #163
Eisenstein wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, lobbying wouldn't be so bad if our government officials just ignored them when they were advocating against the public interest.

Found the lobbyist.

Can I be a lobbyist that lobbies against lobbying?

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#166

Post by techdragon »

flacebo wrote: post #138
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

When the company I work for was buying a brand new swiss grinding machine (which enables the manufacturing of some extremely precise parts), I had to fill and sign a very strange statement about: - the exact kind of goods that we will use the machine for - certify that we will not use it in any nuclear explosive activity, or unsafeguarded nuclear fuel-cycle activity, or the use of nuclear, chemical or biological weap…

It will be the centrifuges, and the extra words are to help obscure the intended target of the promise in an effort to continue the wide scale obfuscation of nuclear technology as part of the whole “born secret” international non-proliferation effort thing.

The issue with nuclear weapons isn’t the weapon it’s the enrichment. The isotopic separation via centrifugal forces is the most efficient and technically challenging method of enrichment, and the hardware required involves extremely high RPMs and requires running them non stop round the clock in banks of hundreds of connected together so that the tiny fraction of a percentage each individual centrifuge can enrich the isotopes eventually ends up adding up to a significant enough to be useful for nuclear stuff.

As you can imagine building a 50 thousand RPM centrifuge to run 24/7 is quite challenging and involves a lot of high precision parts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_centrifuge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zippe-type_centrifuge

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#167

Post by brianpan »

jcrawfordor wrote: post #16
schoen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this interact with the norm of commercial vessels responding to distress calls at sea? I know distress calls aren't at all the same as search and rescue, but in some incidents both phases must occur.

Ships nearby responding to a distress call is a matter of expedience rather than good planning - something is better than nothing. But typically once an organization like a coast guard gets involved, they start giving orders to other responding ships, including sending ships away if they aren't needed and adding to the fray. This general concept is called incident command or the incident command system (ICS) after a…

ICS is also how we handle software outage response (aka on-call). And yes, it originated from firefighting response.

https://response.pagerduty.com/training/courses/incident_res...

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#168

Post by mindslight »

autokad wrote: post #155
efitz wrote: post #109

> It is unwise, in the course of a search and rescue operation, to report that you think the vessel was irrecoverably lost. I made this point several times on social media during the Titan incident but it fell on deaf ears; it seemed crazy to me that people were accusing the US Navy of some nefarious cover-up regarding possible acoustic detection of implosion. Anyone who’s ever worked with any type of signal analysis…

I'd rather the Navy be pretty sure they were dead and tell me, instead of keeping it to themselves just because they might be wrong. No one was saying don't look, people were annoyed they pretended they knew nothing when they where 99% sure the sub imploded.

> I'd rather the Navy be pretty sure they were dead and tell me

Yes, because obviously you and us other media gawkers were the most important consideration here. Not you know, the families stuck essentially knowing their loved ones were dead, but still not having heard those words that finalize it. Also I don't know why they have to delay publicizing it to tell the families directly, when they could just hear it from the same news broadcast as everyone else .

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#169

Post by pugworthy »

There was a SOSUS based on the Oregon coast near where I grew up. For years it was, "That naval base" but there were rumors of cables going off shore for a long time.

It would be interesting to know what the compute power was there back when, let alone what kind of people worked there.

Re: Underwater ears everywhere

#170

Post by xattt »

autokad wrote: post #155
efitz wrote: post #109

> It is unwise, in the course of a search and rescue operation, to report that you think the vessel was irrecoverably lost. I made this point several times on social media during the Titan incident but it fell on deaf ears; it seemed crazy to me that people were accusing the US Navy of some nefarious cover-up regarding possible acoustic detection of implosion. Anyone who’s ever worked with any type of signal analysis…

I'd rather the Navy be pretty sure they were dead and tell me, instead of keeping it to themselves just because they might be wrong. No one was saying don't look, people were annoyed they pretended they knew nothing when they where 99% sure the sub imploded.

I thought the timing of the announcement was interesting. The implosion was not confirmed until the last few hours of the oxygen countdown media frenzy.
Post reply on HN