I would hate to have amazon here. I don't need my rent to go up or my commute to get longer.
944 karma · joined August 25, 2016
> 1. Why were the iceberg warnings ignored?
Its not the Captain's fault if information never reaches him. Trying to say Smith ran a sloppy ship or that was a "systemic failure of communications" is merely displaying ignorance.
> 2. Why was the iceberg not seen until too late?
The important phrase here is "The Titanic was going too fast for the crew to react because Captain Smith allowed his ship to exceed a safe speed for navigation conditions." And I'll grant this is fair. This was one of the situation where 4-5 unlikely things happened all at once. However, I will note that not all of this was on the Captain. Some of this is on the White Star Line and the macaroni operator. Without relevant info, Smith was justified in his expectation to not have to worry about iceburgs at that time of year.
> 3. Why was the Titanic traveling too fast for navigation conditions?
This is just a reiteration of point 2. Therefore I refer you to what I said there.
> 4. Why did the rivets fail?
"Captain Smith knew how dangerous an iceberg collision could be yet he still risked his ship being operated in unsafe conditions." I'm sure he also knew what would happen if a boiler exploded, yet he still allowed them to be fired on his ship. This article is just grasping at straws at this point. Captain Smith is in no way responsible of the construction of the ship and all accounts say he was not fully briefed on issues until _after_ the collision. And there was no reason to expect him to be! He was the Captain, not the architect. He had a reasonable expectation of quality of construction, just like when you buy a phone you expect it to function as advertised without having to be an expert on electrical and hardware engineering to make sure.
> 5. Why were there insufficient lifesaving equipment and procedures in place?
Again, this is the fault of the White Star Line. Blaming the captain for "allowing" the ship to be taken out of port shows a gross misunderstanding of the relationship between Captain and Company. A pilot expects the mechanics to make a plane airworth, and is not at fault for mechanical failure in flight. The captain is responsible for operation of the ship, not the construction or engineering or basic preparations of the ship. Are we going to blame him for lack of preparation if the bar ran out of martini olives?
This article is trying to bank on "TITANIC MYSTERY FINALLY SOLVED" and shows a fundamental lack of understanding. Which is quite shocking, to be honest, since they got a lot of the facts correct. The only thing I can guess is that they went into this article with an agenda and twisted interpretations until they got what they wanted.
As I said above, the Titanic was a death by a thousand paper cuts. Unfortunately, it was a necessary death to give us the marine safety regulations we have today. If any number of things had been just slightly different on the Titanic, it would be a footnote in history and we would be talking about a different ship that would have inexplicably had everything go wrong.
In a parking lot, the shape, combined with the mechanics of parking, means that it helps to angle things. Though, you do lose one parking spot or so in the process.
In a plane, the sides of the object (in this case the upright coffin sized space you fit into) are roughly the same, so angling will do little to help and is largely unneeded to "park" yourself. Ultimately though, airlines are unwilling to lose that one row if they did compensate for the morphing a reclined seat does for the shape of things.
The other major budget problem is welfare/comunal programs. These have been hyperinflated over the last 20-30 years or so. I personally believe one of the reasons it works so much better in Europe is the fact that any given program is orders of magnitude smaller than American attempts. To improve quality-of-life to the level the article wants, I think America need to trim (trim, not cut) military spending and stop welfare spending entirely and let the states handle it (with parameters of course, but it would be a far less unwieldy beast for them handle).
Monthly: Definitely nothing. The only thing even remotely worth that amount that I absolutely need is housing. Odds are, the reason I'm doing "the thing" is to save that $1000. And if I'm not doing it, I obviously won't pay for it.
How do I know this? Well, because I can still get a gallon of milk or loaf of bread for ~$3. If I put that $3 into bitcoin, I'd get some fraction of a coin (roughly 0.0001). Which is all well and good until the bubble bursts, and suddenly milk is worth 0.1 bitcoins. Did milk suddenly become 1000x more valuable? No, bitcoin lost value.
This is something I don't understand about people who say they "cashed out of fiat currency". Fiat currency is still what everything is valued by. The value of a gallon is milk is relatively stable. Compared to this, fiat fluctuates a little, and bitcoin is a drunk on a rollercoaster.
Which, if you consider fiat currencies to be a bubble, would make me even more concerned for bitcoin as it is a bubble within a bubble.
This is exactly how Spotify get my money. It's so much easier than trying to manage a pirated collection.
This is something I don't understand about people who say they "cashed out of fiat currency". Fiat currency is still what everything is valued by. The value of a gallon is milk is relatively stable. Compared to this, fiat fluctuates a little, and bitcoin is a drunk on a rollercoaster.
Maybe bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme, but it can still bankrupt you. And when it is all said and done, what's the difference?
I'd agree with most of the rules, though I wonder how many more people will ever need to learn them. Unfortunately, IRC is a fading medium. There will be those who always stick with it, but they will be growing fewer in number every day.
I did refresh the page, which was how I found the the input field again. Yep. Given the comments here on HN, it is fairly evident not many do.
What? I'm getting fat on pasta and breads. I need to actively eat more meat. And given the cost of meat compared to carbs, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the vast majority of people in the middle and lower class face the same problem. Meat is not the health problem here.
Flexibility. It is a hard 8-5? Or can I swing it either way an hour or two if need be?
Commute. It needs to be a reasonable drive in the morning. Work already takes enough of my day, I don't want to sacrifice the rest to the gods of traffic.
Pay. It needs to be reasonable. Obviously.
Benefits. This gets the honor of picking up any slack in the pay department.
Thanks to equifax, all my most important information is probably already out in the wild, and thanks to the US government (and how they deal with replacing identifying information) I'm likely screwed for the rest of my life. In the face of that, the harm that google or facebook (which I'll admit to using less and less of) can do to me seems trivial.
Yeah, as a user, I'm a commodity online. But I'll be damned if I'm not enjoying the bread and circuses they use to keep me there. There is little to nothing I can do to prevent anyone from doing anything with my information, so I might as well take advantage of what I've already "paid" for.