390
submitted 2 years ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Orbituary@lemmy.world 142 points 2 years ago

Corporations cut corners because the fines they're issued by the government don't go far enough. They get a slap on the wrist and work it out in the wash.

[-] doublejay1999@lemmy.world 48 points 2 years ago

It feels like I’m always writing the same thing but : Cost of doing business.

[-] Orbituary@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

Paraphrasing what I said and almost typed. I felt it obvious because I too say it constantly.

[-] baru@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago

Corporations cut corners because the fines they're issued by the government don't go far enough.

But in the example for the shipping company the example is that the company used a minimum amount of crew. Using a minimum amount of crew isn't something they'd get fined for.

If the regulation wasn't enough or if tugs should've been used then it's strange to claim that the fine isn't high enough. As the regulations were followed.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

We've already seen reports that laws on the books for disasters like the Titanic to limit liability of the corporations...

They spend all their profits on lobbying lawmakers to always cut them a break.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 64 points 2 years ago

Why don't we treat stuff like this like car collisions? The owner of the ship should be on the hook for the entire bridge cost plus loss of life.

[-] confusedwiseman@lemmy.world 41 points 2 years ago

Because corporate personhood is different than person personhood?

I always find it interesting to take corporate fines, translate them to a % of gross income and then apply it to my salary to put it in perspective.

Here’s the best part, a basic 1st offense traffic ticket is usually way more expensive. (I assume a ticket would be around $250 not counting the increased insurance rates.)

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 44 points 2 years ago

Corporations are people up to and until they have to face any consequences.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 years ago

Ay and then they become rich people...

[-] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Because corporate personhood is different than person personhood?

Yes, in the sense that the former is fictional bullshit regardless of what the increasingly-illegitimate Supreme Court says.

[-] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago

It gets a little weird with the web of ownership, use case, contract details and people involved.

Ok it can get really weird… hear me out.

Basically in most cases the vessel owner is only liable up to value of the vessel itself. It’s something that like much of the maritime industry came about from practices in the 19th century and vessel ownership back then. Unfortunately, the vessel is likely worth no where near as much as taking out a fucking bridge. Also in any given scenario a vessel could be owned by the captain, owned by a corp, leased by a corp to a captain, leased by a corp to another corp etc. weird ownership scenarios like those are commonplace in shipping.

In certain circumstances a company can be on the hook but the other big wrinkle is determining who is liable in the first place like the vessel crew, or port crew (but for instance if someone from on shore is working on the vessel at the time they are considered acting crewmembers). This is compounded with the whole mechanical error issue and how supposedly the vessel was having maintenance work done before hand, but then lost power twice? Insurance inspectors are going bonkers at this point.

Point is this is a way wackier scenario to deal with compared to your average fender bender. But in a way kinda has to be, not because of lobbying or corporate malfeasance but because of the complex nature of maritime law, shipping, and insurance.

[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 years ago

Thanks for such an interesting perspective. That's pretty complex, but also it makes sense now that I think about it.

[-] nick@midwest.social 1 points 2 years ago
[-] catloaf@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago

They will be. Although, much like with car collisions, it'll be insurance that's on the hook.

[-] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

Before that they have to figure who actually owns the ship. Which may or may not be easy.

[-] nick@midwest.social 36 points 2 years ago

On Wednesday, Maryland State Police recovered the bodies of Alejandro Hernandez Fuentes and Dorlian Ronial Castillo Cabrera inside a pick-up truck submerged 50 feet beneath the Patapsco River.

Fuck, i have nightmares about this kind of shit. Poor guys

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago

In the early 2000's I was working at a saw mill in northwestern Ontario that was a 200 km (120 mile) round trip from home, on a 2 lane highway that zig-zagged through the Canadian shield. There were often lakes on one side and steep ravines on the other, and we often had to dodge moose in the winter (who were kneeling in the middle of the highway licking salt off the road).

One of my crew taught me a valuable lesson then ... that the minute you put the vehicle into drive you also unlock your electric doors, so that if you do end up in the water there is a chance you can get out of the vehicle.

I still do it to this day.

[-] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 10 points 2 years ago

That fucked me all up when I rolled a car.

I was upside down and the emergency fuel pump shutoff had already triggered, but I was freaking out because I couldn’t open the door.

I tried punching out the glass and that didn’t work so finally I thought I had better shut this car off before it catches on fire.

Then I reached up to turn the key off and heard the doors unlock.

[-] nick@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago

Shit that’s good advice. My car does the auto lock shit and I bet if the electronics got fried when we went into the water I’d be screwed

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

My mother used to keep a brick in the car for this reason. I probably should too.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago

they make glass break tools that are much better. They usually also have integrated seat belt cutters. Probably less expensive than a brick. They look like tiny plastic hammers with a hardened bearing as the striking surface.

[-] tyler@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago

Resqme is the best from what I’ve heard. No hammer shape, just press to the window and push.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

If it works, it works.

The spring loaded things are basically automatic center punches.

Whatever you do get, simplicity and ease of use should be top of mind.

Remember , in a crash you’re probably dazed from the impact (and air bag,) and jonsing on adrenaline. Basically, you become a total moron.

[-] JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Further to this if you have an old spark plug at home, crack the white ceramic part off the spark plug with a hammer and the little shards (also known as ninja rocks) will break glass when thrown or hammered against the window.
They work because their 'hardness' is higher than the window glass and cause it to shatter. Also breaking a car window with a brick is much harder than it appears (i locked my keys in my car once a few hours from home, and it didnt work after repeated attempts).

Another thing (if your ever in the situation) car windscreens are designed to be pushed out from the inside, so if trapped just put your feet against the glass and push and it will pop right out.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Get a quality glass breaker and seatbelt cutter instead. Make sure you clip it or stick it somewhere so it can't move. Things have a tendency to shift around violently in a car-wreck, which is exactly why you shouldn't have a loose brick in your car.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

50 is an interesting number, considereding it's only about 35 feet deep under the bridge. I wonder if they were swept down stream a significant way

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 24 points 2 years ago

This kind of feels like it was written by a large language model. There's lots of content. But there's no through line. No cohesive narrative tying it all together.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 years ago

Ironic when they're trying to talk about Corporations Cutting Corners, eh?

[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago

Yeah, I noticed the same thing. Lots of paragraphs that start with "[person/thing] is [context/role]". I wonder whether it's actually human written, but they poorly integrated too many individual perspectives into the article. Building a narrative from fragments in this way takes a lot of skill to pull off, perhaps they were too ambitious (or too cautious — I've seen this pitfall when the writer is too tentative in making their own argument on a spicy topic)

[-] moitoi@feddit.de 15 points 2 years ago

It shows us again that we must have strong regulations and that the Market™ is a belief.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

The Market is real. An invisible hand guiding it is a belief.

[-] moitoi@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

The growth is the god, the market is the Messiah and the invisible hand is a dogma.

All are just beliefs.

For the invisible hand, it's a dogma as at the beginning it meant the complete opposite of what it means since the 1960s.

[-] toiletobserver@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago
[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

That's weird. I heard the bridge collapsed because the mayor is a black guy.

[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 2 years ago

Wtf, a container is bigger than most ships in there.

this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
390 points (97.3% liked)

News

35714 readers
703 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS