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

Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 204 posts

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#191

Post by HWR_14 »

listenallyall wrote: post #119
HWR_14 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about plausible deniability. They know the information is top secret. They asked the Navy for comment and were probably told that. The 1st amendment still protects the reporter. They are legally in the clear. The person who told them is not.

The First Amendment doesn't mention anything about secrets, that's not what this is about. If I sell you a stolen item, and you know it is stolen , you're guilty of a crime. If you later try to sell or move those goods, that's a more severe crime, fencing. In this case the reporter is obtaining "stolen" information and passing it along, it's exactly the "fencing" of information. I'm aware this practice has been going…

The Supreme Court had ruled that the publication of secret information is a first amendment issue[0]. Stolen information is fine. Theft has not a thing to do with it.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United...

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#192

Post by ALittleLight »

tw04 wrote: post #178
ALittleLight wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hey, we're pretty sure your family is dead, because we heard them die, but we're going to give you a few days of thinking they're suffocating to death in a cold dark can because..." This is just reasoning after the fact. It doesn't make sense to conceal evidence. If this used some secret technology, okay, why say it publicly now? If it's okay to be public, why not a few days ago?

"Hey we heard a loud boom that may or may not mean your family is dead, and we have no other source of confirmation at this point but just stew on that for a few days while we try to confirm." Do you have NO empathy? Why would they tell the family they think everyone is dead without verifiable proof and within the window in which they could still be alive? (4 days of oxygen). What is the benefit beyond a bunch of vir…

I'm rolling my eyes at the "Do you have NO empathy" bit. Is it empathy that drives one to lie by omission to obfuscate the death of others? Is that the word for it?

You don't have to tell the family you're certain they are dead, if you aren't, but you should tell the family "We heard a sound consistent with implosion at the same time we simultaneously lost communications and telemetry from the sub. The most rational explanation is that they are all dead." Once you've told the family, you should tell the public.

What people are engaging in here, you included, is some kind of baffling Just World bias. That is, this unusual circumstance has happened - the sub imploded, the government knew, the government waited days to tell the public, and now you and others are defending the government's actions - as if, because it happened this way it must be justified in happening this way. In reality, of course, it's completely irrational - that's why you don't even bother to defend the course of events rather than imply I lack empathy (which, again, backwards because you are defending lying to the bereaved for no gain, in order to deceive them into believing their loved ones are huddled in the cold and dark and slowly suffocating when you know they are not).

There is absolutely no reason to temporarily conceal the deaths. The government should have notified the families with their information, and then the public.

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#193

Post by listenallyall »

HWR_14 wrote: post #191
listenallyall wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The First Amendment doesn't mention anything about secrets, that's not what this is about. If I sell you a stolen item, and you know it is stolen , you're guilty of a crime. If you later try to sell or move those goods, that's a more severe crime, fencing. In this case the reporter is obtaining "stolen" information and passing it along, it's exactly the "fencing" of information. I'm aware this practice has been going…

The Supreme Court had ruled that the publication of secret information is a first amendment issue[0]. Stolen information is fine. Theft has not a thing to do with it. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United...

The First Amendment is a constant, like a straight line, applicable to every American and all speech. The First Amendment gives you the right to say anything. However, the courts have recognized that there are a few rules that supersede even the First Amendment -- the classic "can't say fire in a crowded theater," but also libel, blatantly false advertising, etc. It's not that the First Amendment doesn't apply, but some other law or rule has higher priority, i.e. above that flat, constant line that is the 1st.

A government official privy to classified information is subject to secrecy rules that supersede the 1st. The question at issue is whether a journalist who becomes privy to the the same classified information is subject to the same rules. "The question before the court was whether the constitutional freedom of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, was subordinate to a claimed need of the executive branch of government to maintain the secrecy of information." i.e. which takes priority, the 1st, or rules about secrecy (the Espionage Act, in this case).

From your wikipedia article: "New York Times v. United States ... did not void the Espionage Act or give the press unlimited freedom to publish classified documents." The Court did not say that journalists have free reign, they simply refused to grant an injunction against publication. While this, and subsequent cases, certainly signal wide breadth of press freedom, it's not absolute and not a guarantee against a future prosecution.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/22/521009791...

FBI Director James Comey demurred. "That's a harder question, as to whether a reporter incurs criminal liability by publishing classified information," Comey said.

freedom of the press is not absolute, even in the U.S. According to a recent paper from the Congressional Research Service, the question is far from settled

The justices didn't block the government from exercising what's called "prior restraint" — that is, preventing a news organization from publishing or broadcasting news.

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#194

Post by davidktr »

hrunt wrote: post #31

Those who are familiar with US submarine operations would assume this from the start. For an excellent account of the development of US submarine capabilities (including listening and detection), I wholeheartedly recommend the book "Blind Man's Bluff".[0] How that book hasn't been made into a mini-series is beyond me. The stories and characters are incredible. [0] https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Mans-Bluff-Submarine-Esp…

Based on your recommendation, I just read the first chapter, a harrowing account of how the first sub-based spy mission against Murmansk went catastrophically wrong.

During a rescue operation in the Arctic ocean, several submariners were tossed into the sea. Some of them were killed by their experimental life preservers, until then untested under real world conditions.

The life preservers were floating devices sewn into foul weather gear and boots. The boots were attached to the rest of the suit and could only be removed using a special tool. When hitting the frigid water, a number of the floating devices sewn into jackets burst, leaving the boots as the only buoyant part of the suit.

While the men's boots pulled their feet upwards, the weight of the rest of the suit pulled them under water. Quickly tiring in the churning sear, several drowned, feet pointing upwards.

Lesson still not learned: Equipment untested in the intended domain of application has not been tested.

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#195

Post by BestGuess »

bombcar wrote: post #160
BestGuess wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Been lookin over that and it's a very interesting one. The man has got to have done the most extensive and exhaustive search for a missing person in goddamn history damn near by himself what with all the criss-crossing lines and different search methods. There's a kind of fascination with that sort of dedication makes one darn near want to jump up and volunteer just from the pull of it. Though have to edit to say, I…

This video offered a good theory based on all data: https://youtu.be/2J9wsJb8P1Y A sobering realization how dangerous a simple walk can be.

I had stumbled my way there, but I appreciate it in case I hadn't. I should have linked that once I found it in my edit on reflection so much obliged sir for the help there

my thinking is there's a lot of learning to be had from people who are doing this kind of thing. How much faster could we find people if we act like they've got good reasons to them that got them lost? Like with bad maps. Or even being better able to find people while they're alive if things like those maps and other things are looked over and you try to mentally figure out what they think might make sense? Walk a mile in someone's shoes. I ain't no expert on this but I keep reading police reports or park reports on missing people and a lot of times it seems like searchers mistake their idea of the fact with the lost persons idea of the fact. am I crazy or does that seem like a really big mistake? I'd like to know more just don't know where to go learning more about this sorta thing

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#196

Post by appleflaxen »

fransje26 wrote: post #140
xienze wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cynical part of me thinks everyone involved knew what had happened on Sunday. There was ample evidence that the submersible imploded (repeated stress on a carbon fiber frame, zero regard for safety, the fact that all communication was lost permanently). Then there was the fact that the logistics involved in a rescue were basically insurmountable. The Navy/Coast Guard saw this as a good live training exercise and…

> the media got a great story. Don't quite know what was so great about this story. It was a textbook example of the catastrophic consequences of hubris meeting ignorance, and that was about it. The rest was just milking the drama as timed passed by with decreasing theoretical oxygen reserves.

If you are the media, a good story is one that drives clicks.

It seems like this story did that.

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#197

Post by phpisthebest »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #169
phpisthebest wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, it is also true the person that controls if information can be released or not from military channels, aka the commander in chief, is also the one that has several high profile news stories cooking

Because no-one ever leaks info in large bureaucracies?

Well there was reports that this information was leaked and the news media had this information days before it was officially reported but the news media chose not to report on that leaked information which is also curious

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#198

Post by bombcar »

BestGuess wrote: post #195
bombcar wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This video offered a good theory based on all data: https://youtu.be/2J9wsJb8P1Y A sobering realization how dangerous a simple walk can be.

I had stumbled my way there, but I appreciate it in case I hadn't. I should have linked that once I found it in my edit on reflection so much obliged sir for the help there my thinking is there's a lot of learning to be had from people who are doing this kind of thing. How much faster could we find people if we act like they've got good reasons to them that got them lost? Like with bad maps. Or even being better able…

One thing to remember is that for the major agencies the rescue part is important; so they will search all the likely survivable locations first because those are the best chance of saving a life, even if there are technically more likely locations that assume death.

It’s also why the “tell people where you’re planning on going, don’t leave the trail, stick to the plan, make it easy to find you” are important survival techniques.

Even just learning how to make markings on the ground that can be seen from low-flying aircraft may save you someday (contact a local civil air patrol and ask to go along on a training flight to see how hard it can be to identify even something as large as a plane from the air).

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#199

Post by predictabl3 »

phpisthebest wrote: post #151
kccoder wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes, on a planet with 8 billion people, more than one newsworthy event happen concurrently without coordination or conspiracy.

While true, it is also true the person that controls if information can be released or not from military channels, aka the commander in chief, is also the one that has several high profile news stories cooking

Hunter Bidens pp blew up the sub and the plans were on his laptop. Checkmate atheists.

Re: Top secret U.S. Navy system heard titan implosion days ago

#200

Post by BestGuess »

bombcar wrote: post #198
BestGuess wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had stumbled my way there, but I appreciate it in case I hadn't. I should have linked that once I found it in my edit on reflection so much obliged sir for the help there my thinking is there's a lot of learning to be had from people who are doing this kind of thing. How much faster could we find people if we act like they've got good reasons to them that got them lost? Like with bad maps. Or even being better able…

One thing to remember is that for the major agencies the rescue part is important; so they will search all the likely survivable locations first because those are the best chance of saving a life, even if there are technically more likely locations that assume death. It’s also why the “tell people where you’re planning on going, don’t leave the trail, stick to the plan, make it easy to find you” are important surviva…

Sorry since I don't know about it I probably explained myself very bad. I did mean about the rescue part. Like the guy was still alive while they were searching so I wonder how important getting into the persons head is for "figure out what makes sense to that person given what they know" to finding people before they die especially. Like could they have found the guy if they looked at the maps people knew he had, and saw that the topography thing makes it look to someone who doesn't know the area that well that it might be the best way to get toward the road again if he got lost? That's what I'm trying to get at. The lessons these guys learn trying to piece together where someone ended up and how they died it seems really important to learn those lessons to find people before they die too.

I'm sorry I don't know any of the terms for search and rescue or anything so I have no idea how to make what I am saying make sense.

Post reply on HN