CEO Who Said Safety Is a “Waste” on Board Lost Submarine (futurism.com)

submitted 1 year ago by botlt_test@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The CEO of the company whose Titanic-seeking submarine has been missing for nearly two days once said safety was a "pure waste."

all 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] fiestapinguino@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

I work as a researcher in the university lab OceanGate used to test their vessels. My colleague told me that they would have tests run 7 times resulting in 6 failures and 1 success. OceanGate engineers (maybe their leadership?) would chalk that up as a success and keep going. My colleague says no one in the building would ever get into anything these "morons" built.

I assume there's a fair bit of hyperbole in this, but I think it generally is matching what we're seeing. Oh, also the general consensus here is that their hull caved in and they've been dead for a while.

[-] dystop@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Jesus that's just terrifying.

[-] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I highly doubt they will ever find the sub, its too small and could be literally anywhere.

edit: debris field found - https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65967464?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=64946dc7f2e5745fd8a782db&Debris%20field%20found%20-%20US%20Coast%20Guard&2023-06-22T15:50:32.421Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:021873ea-55df-41f9-9de5-926aaf985678&pinned_post_asset_id=64946dc7f2e5745fd8a782db&pinned_post_type=share

[-] BloodyFable@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Oof, crow for dinner in 30 minutes or less.

[-] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

One thing I can say is if they ever do find the sub intact, its very likely these guys recorded their last hours on their phones and we are very likely to see that at some point… talk about nightmare fuel.

[-] ThreeHalflings@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I don't think waterproof phones are waterproof at that depth.

[-] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes if the cabin filled up with water then the data would not be retrievable. But it sounds now like they have found a debris field so the thing imploded. Best way for them to go really.

[-] Saga@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

"You know, at some point, safety is just pure waste," Rush told CBS' David Pogue during an episode of his "Unsung Science" podcast. "I mean, if you just want to be safe, don't get out of bed, don't get in your car, don't do anything. At some point, you're going to take some risk, and it really is a risk-reward question."

There's a slight difference between driving in a car and going to the bottom of the ocean in tin can. These are not equivalent.

This dumbass earned his Darwin award, it's just too bad he had to take four other people with him who were lied to about the safety of the expedition.

[-] dudeami0@lemmy.dudeami.win 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

To quote the article:

I mean, if you just want to be safe, don't get out of bed, don't get in your car, don't do anything. At some point, you're going to take some risk, and it really is a risk-reward question.

Because passenger vehicle safety hasn't had leaps and bounds since their inception. This is the equivalent of "don't get hurt" on job sites, and has about the same results. Regulations are written in blood.

[-] Konman72@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I propose that we replace the phrase "hoisted by your own pitard" with "sunk by your own submarine." Feels more modern and less like my wife will laugh at me whenever I say it.

[-] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Its too bad that idiot had to take 4 other people to their deaths with him, especially that kid

[-] Nutbane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

We should never replace that phrase, just send your wife this simple explanation to get her on board with it.

[-] slinky317@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Oh no! Anyway

[-] Orez66@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Fuck the billionaires taking submarine rides for shits and giggles.

[-] Impressive_Towel2@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I feel the same about billionaires that take trips to space for fun.

[-] CapnAssHolo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Personally I have no problem with this dude being the billionaire's underwater tour manager.

[-] FrankTheHealer@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Real 'leopards ate my face' kind of attitude.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Not many leopards in the north Atlantic.

[-] CaldeiraG@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

He fucked around and found out

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a good candidate for a Darwin Award.

[-] dska22@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I assume that they had quite some time to discuss the topic since Sunday, unfortunately.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

"I think I can do this just as safely while breaking the rules," he added at the time.

Doesn’t sound that out of context to me. Rules and regulations are written in blood. FAFO

[-] skillissuer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

not if they were crushed instantly by water pressure, as it appears to be the case

[-] ulu_mulu@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago

I think those kind of statements shouldn't be taken out of context.

I mean, it's not wrong to say there has to be a balance between security and usability, but neglecting security measures is a totally different thing.

It's true that, unfortunately often, top managers are the ones always trying to be cheap on security, but I don't think it's fair trying to imply someone actually did by publishing a statement out of context.

This thing will be investigated for sure, let's not start a witch-hunt before knowing the facts.

[-] STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You have a point, but in this case, I don't think it's really out of context. His attitude was very relevant to this tragedy imo

[-] ulu_mulu@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

But he's inside the submarine dying with the others, can he really be so stupid as to risk his own life?

[-] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Ignorance and overconfidence in one self can lead to decisions that puts one in danger. If he didn't understand the risks, overestimeted his control over the situation (as very rich people are prone to do) or simply surrounded himself with too many yes-men, then hi might not have thought he put himself in as much danger as he did. On the other hand he could also just see himself as an explorer and seeking rhe thrill as many of the dead bodies on Everest once did.

I'm sure there are many reasons he could have gone into that sub despite having been told the risk. I of course can't know for sure, but it does seem more likely in light of his comment than without it.

[-] SlowNPC@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

They're clearly not witches, as evidenced by the fact that they don't float.

[+] ech0@lemmy.world -10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So here's what he actually said:

"You know, at some point, safety is just pure waste," Rush told CBS' David Pogue during an episode of his "Unsung Science" podcast. "I mean, if you just want to be safe, don't get out of bed, don't get in your car, don't do anything. At some point, you're going to take some risk, and it really is a risk-reward question."

I don't think that's unreasonable. I mean you can never go outside again to be safe but most people are gonna take a little bit of risk and go outside to get groceries or meet friends.

[-] meteotsunami@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

There is a huge difference between acceptable risk and recklessness. Reading his interviews he was a cowboy and this was an inevitability. This was in essence a murder suicide.

[-] keanu0396@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

There's also the concept of informed risk, which realtes to informed consent, and this can be a big issue.

For example, if I ask a friend to come for a drive with me, they'll likely say "yes" on the assumption that the car is road safe and I have passed my driving test. But if I wait until we're already on the road to tell them that the fuel line sprays petrol into the footwell and the engine constantly misfires, then they agreed without understanding the full risks, and might have decided differently if they had all the info ahead of time.

I think any "reasonable person" would refuse to enter that sub if they were given a full understanding of the risks posed, and their likelihood.

[-] meteotsunami@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

You bring a great point and the one thing that boggles my mind in this disaster. Listening to the sub owner and reading his legal release, I can't fathom (bad pun) signing on and saying sign me up! It's like the same friend you mentioned told you the fuel line leaks but that's ok, because the department of highway safety exists only to reduce profits and kill fun. We could make it to our destination or die in a fiery crash, YOLO.

[-] Knoll0114@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I guess they thought since it'd gone down and up before it'd be fine. Chanced it one too many times.

[-] cdipierr@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Not unreasonable, but getting out of bed and going to the most dangerous part of our planet don't really equate, you know? And when your own engineers are telling you you've made something unsafe, but you just keep going?? Well...

[-] liara@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

They also learned nothing from a previous experience where the sub lost contact and got lost for hours. There were discussions of adding a beacon to the sub but that clearly never happened.

I guess the CEO never expected cutting corners would directly affect his life.

[-] cdipierr@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

According to that news article where it got lost for 2.5 hours, the CEO said he wasn't going to try again until summer '23. So I'm reasonably certain the sub's two attempts at diving resulted in one temporary and one permanent loss. The reporter who went on that successful dive and didn't die must feel like he dodged a bullet.

[-] A_A@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thanks for the quote.
The reward for a billionaire making such a trip is to brag by saying he did something we couldn't do. Risk he took was high despite his belief.
No insurance plan exists to pay for the rescue operations of such idiotic selfish trips even after this question was discussed concerning sail boat races around the world's seas.
On the other hand, the reward for making the groceries is to have food to stay alive. Risks of death for grocery's trip is less than 1/100_000_000 (very rough estimate).
Let's put our resources and energy where it is sensible.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Eh I think their answer is dishonest, and I've had way too much exposure to risk calcs at work lately. Risks aren't born equally. Getting out of bed? Ridiculously low risk. Driving in my car? Still low risk, but higher. Skydiving? A lot higher risk, although it depends on the rate at which parachutes fail.

[-] keeb420@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

If it were just his life in his hands, maybe I'd feel different, but he chose to pit others life in his hands. When you do that you need to care about safety.

[-] STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree it's not that unreasonable of a decision to make for yourself. I'm the same way, I do things that many people would consider dangerous while out climbing.

However he was responsible for other people's safety... and now he's responsible for other people's deaths.

this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2023

41 points (97.7% liked)

World News

38553 readers

2551 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world