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

I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

suanto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 167 posts

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#91

Post by jarofgreen »

fusslo wrote: post #5

I love these long-form build logs. I just started reading, and I am making the faux-pas of commenting before finishing. But, I'm wondering what the challenges are of automating the ROV to map a body of water's floor in a pattern. like a grid pattern, or whatever is most efficient. At first I was thinking currents would cause displacement. but can't we sense the current moving us in undesirable ways and correct with t…

Lakes can have currents.

I wonder if pedantically speaking the definition of lake would include non-tidal in many countries but ....

A) humans use names sloppily and if it's an important detail I wouldn't assume a lake is non-tidal without checking.

B) non-tidal bodies of water might still change height over the year, for example after a heavy rainfall.

Mainly I'd question the need to automate it. It's difficult, and in many cases the cost of a human to drive it is tiny compared to all the other costs you need to pay so just do that (as in the article - those weren't automated). Also, driving them can be fun :-)

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#92

Post by martyvis »

drcongo wrote: post #90
spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #17

I would suggest defining any acronyms in the title of an article in the introduction section of the article. Had to get to PART 6 to answer my first question: What is an "ROV"? "The solution was to use an ROV, Remote Operated Vehicle "

Once I got to the end of the first page without finding out, I selected the "ROV" in the title and three-finger-touched my trackpad and it told me the answer. One of the little Mac niceties I'd struggle without.

On my Android Pixel you only need to highlight the text and a definition pops up which can then be swiped further up for other search options

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#93

Post by Dylan16807 »

nosrepa wrote: post #67
tired_star_nrg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why is it asking me to sign in to read this?

The site was posted here and probably other social media in the last day or so. More than likely it's to prevent the site from getting hugged to death.

Prevent?

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#95

Post by mcculley »

mindslight wrote: post #30
scrozier wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is my futile mission in life to help people understand that initials, acronyms, and abbreviations are real barriers to communication.

Funny, because I'd say that jargon is a facilitator of communication between knowledgeable people. It can always be looked up by those with the interest but not the knowledge. I end up doing this all the time, and appreciating reading dumps of domain knowledge and perspective. Meanwhile, writing everything for a lowest common denominator audience creates real barriers to communication - both destroying communications…

HTML has a handy tag for abbreviations and a way to link to definitions. It is a shame that so few bother to use it.

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#96

Post by throwaway81523 »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #72
jonah wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did say there was a front page article about that case.

I know. But a natural conclusion would be “they found the car with his body inside it” or something similar. There was never a clear affirmation of success or detail of what success looked like. It’s ok! Just weird.

The news coverage discusses it a bit. The police identified the body by DNA analysis, which presumably took a while after the car had been located. Reading between the lines, I think there may be some details that the author didn't want to get into. The victims have living relatives who don't need the gruesome specifics to be dragged out.

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#97

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #17

I would suggest defining any acronyms in the title of an article in the introduction section of the article. Had to get to PART 6 to answer my first question: What is an "ROV"? "The solution was to use an ROV, Remote Operated Vehicle "

https://googlethatforyou.com?q=ROV

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#99

Post by suddenclarity »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #65

Frankly, my takeaway here is that police detectives in Finland are poorly trained and not very good at analytical thinking. In the first case, if they'd reasoned things out like the author did, they could have simply had someone walk alongside the road that he was likely to be on, they would have seen pretty obvious evidence of damage to the ground / foliage, gone for a closer look, and seen all the broken car bits.…

We don't know what was said between the author and the police. As stated in the article, it's a cold case where the search had been going on for years and they had several witnesses claiming to have seen the car in a different location.

Finding a car isn't that uncommon. I know one youtuber doing these kind of things found three cars at the same location when searching for a missing person. In Sweden we have one talked about waterfilled hole with at least 17 cars but no one wants to deal with it due to the costs and environmental issues if you start pulling them.

Re: I built an ROV to solve missing person cases

#100

Post by lemonlime0x3C33 »

b33j0r wrote: post #59

This is sort of an aside, I hope no one hates it. I’ve spread myself so thin over the years that I find it hard to get excited about things. If this is your mission, don’t quit. Do it. Second chances are consolation prizes, and a noble cause may only present once.

I hope you can take a break, burn out is real and it is important to take care of yourself! It is never too late to work on something you care about :)
Post reply on HN