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

The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 129 posts

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#51

Post by echoangle »

dudisubekti wrote: post #43
ubermonkey wrote: post #26

Is it "more disturbing," though, really? I mean, privileged rich dude who thinks he knows better than experts wins Darwin award, and some people dumb enough to trust him got to go along for the (one way) ride. I'm not any more disturbed by it now than I was a year ago, and a year ago it barely moved the needle. And then it was only about the 19 year old son of one of the passengers -- even at that age, a child ought…

Stockton Rush is not eligible for Darwin award because he had two children. The 19-year old son is eligible, though he won’t win the award because he was peer-pressured by his dad.

I wanted to ask if the Darwin Award is also possible if you manage to get yourself and your child killed but the father had another daughter which is still alive

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#52

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

rvnx wrote: post #34
725686 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? They tested a prototype. It failed. Anyway, they built a full size thing based on the prototype that failed. They charged a lot of money to unsuspecting rich guys. Then, eventually it failed, just as the test suggested it would.

This is where it's actually interesting, it's not prototype -> live and boom. It's the fifth mission or something, and worked for two years. They actually went to the Titanic with that sub and previously succeeded to reach the Titanic, then it's later on, that the vehicle started to become fragile due to multiple reuses.

>Rather than warning of failure, Green explained that the sounds indicated “irreversible” damage. “It is my belief, substantiated by many years of experience, that composite structures all have a finite lifetime,” wrote Green, who died in 2021. “While I do not intend to be an alarmist, I did not sleep well and arose early to send this message.”

There sure does seem to be a lot of strong expert advice that was willfully ignored, per the article, that their materials choices, testing methodology, and damage monitoring system were setting them up for exactly the disaster that occurred.

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#53

Post by criddell »

psychoslave wrote: post #40
ubermonkey wrote: post #26

Is it "more disturbing," though, really? I mean, privileged rich dude who thinks he knows better than experts wins Darwin award, and some people dumb enough to trust him got to go along for the (one way) ride. I'm not any more disturbed by it now than I was a year ago, and a year ago it barely moved the needle. And then it was only about the 19 year old son of one of the passengers -- even at that age, a child ought…

I didn’t delve this story, I just remember I saw a five minutes info at some tv channel in France, which was interviewing a guy who refused to for the ride just before the launch as he estimated the safety level he was expecting was not there. I don’t know if other riders were aware of that fact, which should have been communicated to them as a big red alert. Sad story, really. These people at least died while active…

> I don’t know if other riders were aware of that fact, which should have been communicated to them as a big red alert.

As I understand it, the passengers were made aware of the risks.

https://www.businessinsider.com/read-oceangate-waiver-titan-...

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#54

Post by Someone »

mrweasel wrote: post #48

The whole idea was/is weird. I can understand undertaking a certain level of risk to get an amazing view of the Titanic, or some other wreck or reef, but that wasn't even what was offered. Regardless of who offered this dive and how it was managed, there would always have been some risk. That risk had to be stupid low for what was offered, a tiny window, offering a really poor viewing experience. It not even like the…

They didn’t offer just that, but also bragging rights for people for whom a few $100k is peanuts.

Basically the same reason people climb Everest and not peaks ‘nobody’ knows about that are a lot less crowded.

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#55

Post by rob74 »

gonzo41 wrote: post #12

Respect the ocean, Space is somewhat mild in comparison.

I don't think space is milder, but to get up there, you first have to build a working rocket, which will make sure that you generally know what you are doing. The ocean doesn't have such a barrier, you can theoretically lower anything into the water and try to get to the Titanic...

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#56

Post by [deleted] »

edf13 wrote: post #5
rvnx wrote: post #4

He already got punished by life, no need to blame him posthumous. He is like one of the inventors of the parachute (Franz Karl Reichelt), still wanted to try because he believed in it. Unfortunately believing is not enough when it comes to reliability. Effort was good though, as apparently it worked at some point. > This submersible design, later renamed Titan, eventually made it down to the Titanic in 2021. It even…

Pretty sure the inventory of the parachute didn't take paying guests on his tests...

[deleted]

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#57

Post by poincaredisk »

mrweasel wrote: post #48

The whole idea was/is weird. I can understand undertaking a certain level of risk to get an amazing view of the Titanic, or some other wreck or reef, but that wasn't even what was offered. Regardless of who offered this dive and how it was managed, there would always have been some risk. That risk had to be stupid low for what was offered, a tiny window, offering a really poor viewing experience. It not even like the…

I imagine the real offer was a certain thrill and uniqueness. People do base jumping, motocykle street racing, free solo climbing on skycrappers, and various other incredibly risky things for a reason. Maybe adrenaline hiy, maybe experience, but certainly not a well thought of risk/benefit balance sheet.

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#58

Post by zer00eyz »

Tepix wrote: post #31
EgregiousCube wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One shouldn’t conclude that regulations lead to positive outcomes from this. In addition to having a disdain for regulation, OceanGate was doing bad engineering. Projects that follow regulation strictly can fail due to bad engineering too.

Arguably we're seeing bad engineering by OpenAI leading to their superalignment team quitting and raise the alarm.

No.

Re-wind the clock:

- A google engineer says "google has AGI"... this leaks and is dismissed.

- MS writes a paper that says GPT has hints of AGI.

- OpenAI signs deal with MS saying they can have everything OpenAI does till they hit AGI.

That last one. Thats not a bet you make if you think AGI is a decade away. Its a bet you make if you think your close.

OpenAI thought that they were close. They fell for the classic AI trap of "if only we had a bigger model". They got high on their own supply and thought that some sort of tipping point would come with size or scale. That a bigger model with MORE data and MORE information would have AGI, sapience or sentience emerge.

It was a bad bet. Q* isnt going to get there, the LLM line is dead.

Why do you need to worry about safety or super alignment if you arent going to get to AGI. They left because there is no THERE, there..

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#59

Post by rob74 »

anshumankmr wrote: post #22
mellosouls wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inventor of the parachute probably didn't take several people with him on false premises.

Yeah that is what the bummer is. And I read somewhere that the contract for passengers explicitly stated they could die, and that it was an experimental vessel approved by nobody.

always read the fine print...

Re: The Titan Submersible Disaster. The Inside Story Is More Disturbing

#60

Post by [deleted] »

specialist wrote: post #28
EgregiousCube wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One shouldn’t conclude that regulations lead to positive outcomes from this. In addition to having a disdain for regulation, OceanGate was doing bad engineering. Projects that follow regulation strictly can fail due to bad engineering too.

Regulations is a scary word for rules. Can you imagine a world without rules? Awful.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN