There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

VariousWorldViews ,

Noooo, don’t do it pleeeease.

foggy ,

I mean ok

But also has an air of “won’t someone please think of the billionaires”

Like, if some dipshit builds rockets and is offering trips to space for a million dollars and you tried to go to space through this clown and idk, not NASA… that’s kinda on you.

But yeah, sure. Preventable deaths, etc.

cmbabul ,

There for sure should be something to regulate the commercial aspect of it, I don’t give a goddamn if some billionaires want to build their own sub, go exploring and die themselves.

But you shouldn’t be able to charge someone or pay someone else to go with/for you unless certain minimum safety standards are met. And you know that’s what these rich asshole will do if given the opportunity

jwagner7813 ,

Who says this couldn’t eventually become a mass produced product though? I 100% believe it should be regulated, even if I could care less for some of the people that were on board. It still should be maintained so people don’t get sucked into unregulated BS, regardless of who gets on board.

Silverstrings ,
@Silverstrings@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

I take the radical perspective that people dying horrible pointless deaths is a bad thing and should be prevented. Yes, even stupid rich people.

foggy ,

So brave

thepiguy ,

Are there that many tourist submarines in the world? Would this even make a difference?

partial_accumen ,

Its international waters. What regulatory body is Cameron proposing has jurisdiction to enforce any regulations?

SomethingBurger ,

Tickets for the tours aren’t sold from international waters, and countries can still sue someone for breaking their laws outside their territories if they want.

chaogomu ,

Except if X country has restrictions, rich assholes will then register the sub in Y country.

The Titan sub was registered out of Bermuda. The carry boat was registered in Canada, it normally docked in the US.

That's how rich asshole work, they register the boat where ever the fuck they want to.

livus ,
@livus@kbin.social avatar

From the article:

Cameron told the event that the shocking loss of the Titan might force international agencies to craft regulations for passenger vessels.

Presumably he means agencies like the IMO (International Maritime Organization), which has written international laws like the International Convention For The Safety Of Life At Sea.

Such laws are usually enforced by regional agencies of the signatory countries.

Chickenstalker ,

Dude. Do you think that “international waters/airspace” means you can just anything? Consider airlines. What happens if you suddenly drop trou and shat in the aisles? You will be restrained and arrested the moment you land. Similarly, people on ships are bound by the laws their ship is flagged with. In addition, insurance companies won’t insure your vessel if you decide to not obey any laws. That alone can destroy your business venture.

partial_accumen ,

Dude. Do you think that “international waters/airspace” means you can just anything? Consider airlines. What happens if you suddenly drop trou and shat in the aisles? You will be restrained and arrested the moment you land.

Cameron is talking about binding the owners not the passengers with his proposed regulations. If I own the airplane I can totally shit on the floor and there is no law to stop me.

Similarly, people on ships are bound by the laws their ship is flagged with.

Exactly, future-risky-sub-owner could simply seek out a country that doesn’t adhere to any safety regulations. I imagine there would be many small nations which could have their “Private submarine regulation” laws bought for a relatively small sum of money.

In addition, insurance companies won’t insure your vessel if you decide to not obey any laws. That alone can destroy your business venture.

The insurance angle is a good one, but that would just mean they would have to go uninsured (or self insured) and risk losing clients that have a problem with it.

mercano ,
@mercano@lemmy.world avatar

It is going to be tricky to regulate, but the expedition ship does come back to shore to resupply. They don’t leave the sub adrift on the high seas, they bring it back with them, and I imagine it’s easier to do maintenance on it on dry land, or at least in the protected waters of port.

Singar ,

I honestly don’t care much about this topic at all. If people want to go down and get imploded, they should be free to do so. It has zero effect on the rest of the world.

DannyBoy ,

@zencat I have Thalassophobia, so for me there's no better regulation than that.

jkmooney , (edited )
@jkmooney@kbin.social avatar

In the aviation world, an experimental aircraft may not be used for "compensation or hire". The only exception is that a kitplane manufacturer is allowed to give demo flights.

Revan343 ,

Is that true in every country on the planet? Because I doubt it.

jkmooney ,
@jkmooney@kbin.social avatar

United States Federal Aviation Administration, I believe EASA is similar.

Revan343 ,

So, no, then.

jkmooney , (edited )
@jkmooney@kbin.social avatar

Those are the two I'm most familiar with in my profession, at least as far as civilian authorities are concerned. Can't really say "no" and, I'm pretty sure neither can you. On the other hand, feel free to prove me wrong with a counter example. :)

Revan343 ,

Difficult to prove a negative, but I would be surprised if there aren’t at least a few third world countries with lax aviation rules.

The point, though, is that strong regulations in the countries that are inclined to regulate these things aren’t actually going to stop persistent rich idiots from doing stupid things. The Titan was against regulations in every country that bothers to regulate submersibles, which is why it only operated in international waters. More regulations won’t change that, there’s still nobody to enforce them.

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

To be clear, it wasn’t a “tourist sub”… so maybe the first regulation should be defining exactly what that is,

jkmooney ,
@jkmooney@kbin.social avatar

The CEO was very careful to skirt applicable regulatory laws. He even called his passengers "crew members". In the aviation world, I have some experience harmonizing multiple regulatory authorities. Because of "international waters", there will need to be some agreement and harmonizing of regulations. There's already SOLAS so, I think it can be done.

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

Absolutely.

The issue is that the regulations that do exist allow them to skirt it by not offering a hard, and broad, definitions of ‘tourist subs’.

Zron ,

A “crew member” would be some kind of employee.

Employees don’t pay a company a quarter of a million dollars to do “work” for eight hours. You don’t pay to work, you get payed to work.

Just because you call someone a crew member doesn’t necessarily mean that would hold up in a court of law.

average650 ,
@average650@lemmy.world avatar

I think if they were alive to sue and be sued… He’d be fucked.

Skavargen ,

Technically I believe they were classified as employees that “donated” to the company. Nice workaround Stockton! Let’s see how that holds up in court with the obvious gross negligence.

Singar ,

The regulations come from the countries that the company is founded in. OceanGate is (was) as US based company.

bearr ,

No need for regulations, just set a price floor please. Only billionaires allowed.

SanndyTheManndy ,

This. Let them eat shit.

i_ben_fine ,

Have the government sell permits for $1M.

inspxtr ,

I wonder about the people who would work on the subs, who are basically not millionaires. Would regulation, insurance and such help them have some protection and compensation?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •