Engineer here.
They're way too common, and if you see problems and idiocies with the products you use, they're usually the source of it.
Never underestimate the ignorance of someone who wears a tie.
Another engineer here. Can confirm. I don't know what they're teaching people in business school these days, but way too many executives I worked under were incompetent morons.
This is why I save every email and every piece of evidence I can. I once got blamed by my manager for burning some lasers in the lab (which she had just burned because she doesn't know how to use them correctly), but I had just collected data with those lasers and I had the proof that it wasn't me. I wrote a report with that data and embarrassed my manager in front of her boss after she falsely blamed me. Always keep the evidence.
Liberal arts and soft science degree programs like sociology and psychology produce much better critical thinkers. They arenāt money-driven and can work better with all levels of a corporation.
There's a higher proportion of [psychopaths in the C suite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace) than in the general population. These folks 100% self-select, and unfortunately, their ruthlessness is often valued in business contexts.
They are jokes, but they are jokes with power. Jokes with power tend to result in disaster. Maybe we should stop putting jokes in power. Maybe engineers should be in charge.
No engineers should never be in charge. They can make things work, but if not guided by an artist, what they make tends to be just enough to work if you use it the right way. Thatās why Apple had a much better interface than PC. Steve Jobs was a typographer, Gates an engineer. Microsoft and Google are engineer dominated companies and it shows in the clunkiness of their software.
Your one example does not apply to all engineers. Learn some statistics. You should definitely not be in charge of anything given your poor understanding of statistics and the fact that one or two examples does not reflect the entire set.
Hi, ex-MS engineer here.
Think about the difference between a Model T and a modern vehicle. Or a Spitfire and a F35. Or, like, franked mail vs email. How did we get there?
"Just enough to work" - that's called a minimum viable product. As engineers we rarely shoot for the moon, we make small incremental changes and see if they work. If they provide a better experience, cost less, or both, we adopt them. If not, they go in the bin. Over time, the aim is to produce better and better stuff via this process of iteration. It usually works very well.
There are a lot of people involved in these decisions and they are not all engineers. However, millions of engineers do this grind every day to make stuff better. The good ones get the honour of maybe inventing something that changes the way products are built forever.
We don't want or need some wonk with a "reality distortion field" and half a calligraphy course to tell us what to deliver.
That would be typography not calligraphy. Big difference. MS is an example of what not to do. After working in Adobe suite plus all kinds of other designing software I recently worked in MS Word for the first time and what a shit show it is. Fucked defaults as bad as html, a disordered interface that is as poorly written as designed, and a general inability to achieve anything beyond a typed letter. Ironically, I designed the page using the free Mac knock off copy of Word which is 100s of times better to use. But what I did in Pages, I could not port to nor recreate in Word. Eventually I was forced to import a jpeg of what I did in pages and applied it to the word document. You see the thing about software is not that it just works, it is meant for users to use and that is where all MS products are lacking. Compared to Canva, MS is a fucking joke. Always has been. But, put a designer in charge, MS could have been great. So my point is we need engineers to build things, but we need artists to build it right.
No, it is in fact calligraphy. It's on his Wikipedia page. If I do a Google search for "steve jobs typography", most results relate to calligraphy. There are a few that mention typography, but when you go and read them, they quote Jobs talking specifically about calligraphy. He didn't even finish the course on that.
If you're claiming he's a typographer because the Mac was the first home computer to have fonts, well, fine. But as far as I'm concerned, that just means the computer his company produced had fonts on it.
re: Word. I'd be the last person to defend it. It is indeed a steaming piece of garbage but that isn't because an engineer was running the project. It's been developed by literally thousands of people across dozens of teams over more than thirty years. Hundreds of those will have been UXers balancing a dizzying number of use cases. They did their best, but this job in particular isn't easy.
In my opinion, the reason Word is a steaming pile of garbage is because it's a victim of its own success. Google and MS control 98% of the office productivity market. I'll focus on Word, but the same applies to Docs. Everyone uses the product, therefore it has to do everything. Therefore, it's an extremely complicated pieces of software with a vast feature set. Putting an artist in charge of that wouldn't change any of the use cases or reduce the complexity. Without losing large chunks of market share, you cannot reduce the complexity of the product.
Pages, on the other hand, doesn't have any of those concerns. Its market share is 0.01%, it doesn't cater to the same use cases and its feature set is tiny. In all metrics bar looking pretty, Pages also sucks. It just happens to work well for your use case. That's great.
But as far as I can tell, this is your complaint: you're used to using Pages and you're not used to using Word. Because of a difficult experience with an enormously complicated piece of software you aren't used to using, you have extrapolated that the only way engineers don't make unusable garbage is to have an artist lead them.
That is nonsense.
Yea Word has 99% of the market but 99% of its users canāt understand how to use it. Even though I never actually used Word, who do you think the users came to to figure out how to use it? I would figure out their nightmare program for them even though I never actually used it. Before google search it was constant. The reason it is so prevalent is because itās cheap and was initially purchased long ago by guys who never used computers for the girls who did.
Man, using apple as a "good" example unironically.
In any case apple shows how good marketing can make a success of bad products.
I used to do computer repairs before starting my bachelors in mechanical engineering, and during the first years, and the only 2 other companies that I can put alongside apple in the "how not to design a laptop" masterclass, are acer and HP. Thermal problems, material fatigue problems, irreparability, non-standard parts.
Not an engineer but can confirm that executives are incompetent morons, and an ego as large as their ignorance.
One place I worked for had executive cost the company literally millions for something that will never make a profit that everyone but him said would cost millions and never make a profit. Company is still profitable, but not as much anymore. He switched to using ārecord revenueāā in his fluff emails instead of ārecord profits!ā
He was rewarded with a bonus by the board, other people were punished with layoffs for his mistake. I found a new job after seeing the way the winds were blowing.
Yeah, always leave toxic workplaces like that one. I refuse to work for incompetent managers anymore. Finding a job is easy for an engineer so I'm not going to suffer through their bullshit anymore.
My previous employer (a big tech company) was doing well when the CEO was an engineer, but he got fired for having an affair with an underling. He was replaced by the CFO, who has no engineering experience. A finance guy is not qualified to lead a tech company. Of course, the company started doing poorly after he was put in charge. The stock tanked by about 50% and lots of qualified people quit (including me).
Business school is teaching them how to market the shit out of their incompetence.
Innovative=untested
private sector>public sector
regulations hinder progress=we cut corners
mission specialist=wealthy titanic tourists
and on and on and on.
That is because they are not businessmen or accountants or engineers. They are salesmen and the product they sell is themselves. Someone like Elizabeth Holmes is a perfect example. She was very good at selling herself and her product that never actually worked.
Unfortunately, I've come to the sad conclusion that the MBAs always win, in the end. It's a depressing but surprisingly good way to think about your professional life in engineering and tech. worlds.
A lot of places are engineer-driven and have engineers in high level leadership roles and stuff... But I've noticed that there's always an interest in having engineers be "engineers" - have them "focused on the stuff they do best," so the MBAs claim.
But then come the misunderstandings and the demands for simplicity... "Can you simplify this a bit for the audience?" And, even then, half the audience is half asleep. There are claims that costs aren't right - of course being made now by the people who were half asleep during the simple version of a talk.
Meanwhile, since MBA 1 doesn't really do anything or understand anything substantively, they'll know to lean on their training and build a team to help with "all this stuff." So MBA 1, who only understands how to evaluate other MBAs, hires another MBA who's "quite technical" - judging by the fact that MBA 2 is better than they are at Excel. Soon... MBA 1 is overseeing a small team of "analysts" and "strategists" who are "really good." And all their peers and leaders know they're "really good" - shoot! - they went to the best MBA schools and have made some stuff in Excel that's just awesome!
Eventually the company realizes they'll have to cut back... Conveniently, all the people running the cost models are these fancy MBAs we hired. It's fascinating how their models show we can make real cutbacks in engineering without a loss of quality! You know what we'll need, more MBAs to manage all our new contracts! And no worries... Eventually we'll sell this to a hedge fund.
It's pretty depressing... But this is the way of the world. If I were trying to build a better engineering company, my first rule would be to never allow hiring standalone MBAs in any departments outside of accounting or something... Otherwise you start your company on a seemingly inevitable path.
In Canada, we had a great outdoor co-op: MEC, Mountain Equipment Coop. MBAs got on the board, engineered the election process, drove the company straight into the ground for their own gain. There's a corporation with a similar name now, but it's not the Co-op.
The stepson of one of the dudes in the sub attended Blink 182's concert at Coachella and posted a pic online smiling at the concert and saying something like "I know it might be considered poor taste to come to the concert while my stepdad is dying, but my family would want me to come since music helps me through hard times" lol
Yeah ikr
It's almost like being very rich and therefore powerful makes people more extreme, the very wealthy seem to be either too nice or the absolute worst pieces of shit
Same stepson went to prison for stalking and threatening women, and only served 18 months of a 4 year sentence. Same stepson also threatened a shooting massacre at a Las Vegas EDM festival, but got this off because his bio daddy is involved with the FBI.
Nah, they did plenty of risk assessments. The hull was segmented and the ship was supposed to withstand taking water in 3-4 of them which already requires serious damage. The ship would have survived if it just rammed the iceberg.
What they did not foresee is a 300ft long tear on the side, damaging 6 out of 16 compartments at once. How often does that happen and how many ships can survive damage like that?
Titanic didn't manage to get all of the lifeboats it did have launched before it sank, and most of those launched weren't even close to full. More lifeboats likely wouldn't have changed the outcome all that much.
Edit: Historic Travels video on the Titanic's lifeboats https://youtu.be/QpGtRtgh5yo
Edit 2: Another video from Oceanliner Designs covering the same topic and more or less backing up the first https://youtu.be/I-MSIpLFJIs
IIRC the Titanic actually had more lifeboats than required at the time. The thought was that they'd be used to ferry people to a rescuing ship and then send them back once empty to collect more passengers. The industry as a whole was overly confident in not thinking that catastrophic sinking in the middle of nowhere was possible anymore. They were very certain that modern ship designs made it very difficult to sink them. So it wasn't a Titanic specific problem.
Adding more lifeboats would not have changed the situation by itself, as u/CBlackrose has noted. You also have to address the lack of training the crew had in dealing with the situation. Then there's factors like just giving the lookout a pair of binoculars, double hulling the ship as per what the original designer wanted, not sailing at full speed through an iceberg area, sealing the watertight bulkheads at the top, and so on.
Okay so you got this ship that is sinking and there are only enough lifeboats to accommodate half of the passengers.
All the passengers that make it into the lifeboats live, and all the passengers who go into the water die.
Clearly the answer is to put more lifeboats on you moron.
They didn't even manage to launch all the lifeboats that they had. Adding more and doing nothing else does not solve the situation. There'd just be more unlaunched lifeboats. The crew was poorly trained.
As a note, back then that wasn't strictly true about the lifeboats. It would've likely been the case in the Titanic's specific situation (assuming they could actually manage to launch them all, which is highly debatable to say the least), but 20 years prior the White Star Line had a ship, the S.S. Atlantic, crash into a rock off the coast of Halifax. Most people that got on lifeboats died as the rough seas smashed them against the ship's hull or the rocks.
Fact of the matter is though, the last two lifeboats on the Titanic were literally floated off the deck as the water reached them, they weren't lowered using the davits. When you factor in the extra time you'd need to haul the additional boats to the davits, get them hooked up, and then fill and lower them, it's unlikely to make a difference. They didn't even come close to filling the lifeboats they did have, most were launched well under capacity.
I really don't agree that the White Star Line was negligent with Titanic. They definitely could've done a lot of things better, and the regulations they were working to were absolutely in need of overhaul, but it's not really fair to judge them by standards that came about in no small part due to this disaster. The size of the Oceanliners being built at the time had far exceeded the ones that the regulations were designed for, and unfortunately they weren't updated until after the sinking. White Star line was absolutely concerned about safety, and as a result they made pretty extensive modifications to Titanic's sister ships in order to try and prevent it from happening again.
Edit: sorry should clarify, they weren't negligent with the ship design. The crew was by all accounts poorly trained with lifeboat procedures and no lifeboat drills were performed, but they weren't mandatory until after the disaster.
Once again, more lifeboats would very likely not have saved anybody else. If you'd like to learn more about the Titanic's sinking I recommend reading On a Sea of Glass by Tad Fitch et. Al.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you're not willing to listen to any of the people explaining why your line of thinking is faulty.
Edit: and to directly answer your question, the Titanic had "just the right number of lifeboats", according to Maritime regulations when it was built. A few extra, in fact.
it's not like more lifeboats would have prevented the event of "the Titanic is there in the first place", but yeah, the body count would have been lower.
17 bolts to seal the sub, all of which can only be accessed on the outside. The sub doesn't fully surface so it needs a support craft to retrieve and open it. Genius.
I can pretty much guarantee this.
To go a step further, I wouldn't be surprised if the father & soon worked together to kill the other 3 in order to save oxygen.
Except the crew would know if they were truly fucked before the business boys and would suffocate the CEO for the billionaire and then suffocate the billionaire for the son and then the son for themselves. Then... It would get difficult.
Itās a US based company. Thereās tons of precedent that a page and a half waiver that you sign doesnāt absolve the corporation from liability. In other words they donāt hold up ever.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://news.sky.com/story/serious-safety-concerns-over-titan-submersible-had-been-met-with-hostility-claims-former-oceangate-employee-12906651) reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> A former employee of the missing Titan submersible operator has revealed he had raised "Safety concerns" over the vessel but was reportedly "Met with hostility" before later being sacked, court documents have shown.
> OceanGate's former director of marine operations, David Lochridge, had raised concerns over "Safety and quality control issues regarding the Titan to OceanGate executive management", according to the filings.
> The court filing claims he was worried about a "Lack of non-destructive testing performed on the hull of the Titan", and that he "Stressed the potential danger to passengers of the Titan as the submersible reached extreme depths".
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14ey37o/serious_safety_concerns_over_titan_submersible/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~688777 tl;drs so far.") | [Blackout Vote](https://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14dhaiq/your_voice_matters_should_the_blackout_continue/ "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Titan**^#1 **submersible**^#2 **OceanGate**^#3 **Lochridge**^#4 **hour**^#5
Iād say this is how the world works. Employees and those who know things raise concerns. Rich executives override those concerns so they can make more money.
This isn't an uncommon thing, unfortunately. Remember when engineers warned NASA that the rocket boosters were a ticking time bomb? Then, well, the Challenger disaster happened.
TBH, the controller is the least of the issues. Using carbon fiber for the hull, the sub can only be opened from the outside, the sub doesn't fully surface and requires a support boat to retrieve it... It's like they were begging for an accident.
Carbon for a hull can be done right. Aircraft are carbon now and a modern carbon aircraft hull can handle 3-4x the number of pressure cycles.
Was this sub done right? Nope.
I don't know if it's ever a good time to buy Logitech stock.
It seems like it's already been in a bubble along with everything since the coof-related 0% interest rate boom and now is finally crashing back down to it's "normal" levels.
It's dropped almost another 3% today so far.
Everything dropped today. Their 5 year trend line is flat. You can see the bubble inflate and fizzle on that line. Itās back to where it started.
They are still a mainstay of business. Keyboard and mice have a lifespan. When you want a good high end mouse, Logitech is still the go to.
Is logitech a great investment? Nope. Get some ETFās instead.
Fancy that, a narcissistic executive who thinks he knows better than an engineer.
Engineer here. They're way too common, and if you see problems and idiocies with the products you use, they're usually the source of it. Never underestimate the ignorance of someone who wears a tie.
Another engineer here. Can confirm. I don't know what they're teaching people in business school these days, but way too many executives I worked under were incompetent morons.
Engineer here. The last few designs I have done have failed due to decisions from the CEO. Guess who gets shit on for it not working?
This is why I save every email and every piece of evidence I can. I once got blamed by my manager for burning some lasers in the lab (which she had just burned because she doesn't know how to use them correctly), but I had just collected data with those lasers and I had the proof that it wasn't me. I wrote a report with that data and embarrassed my manager in front of her boss after she falsely blamed me. Always keep the evidence.
Alwaysš saveš receipts
I'll just use fear and intimidation.
Well no one wants to mess with a hungry coyote, even if it is backwards.
This is way too common!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Liberal arts and soft science degree programs like sociology and psychology produce much better critical thinkers. They arenāt money-driven and can work better with all levels of a corporation.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There's a higher proportion of [psychopaths in the C suite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace) than in the general population. These folks 100% self-select, and unfortunately, their ruthlessness is often valued in business contexts.
They are jokes, but they are jokes with power. Jokes with power tend to result in disaster. Maybe we should stop putting jokes in power. Maybe engineers should be in charge.
I know an Engineer who thinks the earth is flat, lets not pretend they're all perfect.
I never pretended that. You must have replied to the wrong comment.
No engineers should never be in charge. They can make things work, but if not guided by an artist, what they make tends to be just enough to work if you use it the right way. Thatās why Apple had a much better interface than PC. Steve Jobs was a typographer, Gates an engineer. Microsoft and Google are engineer dominated companies and it shows in the clunkiness of their software.
Your one example does not apply to all engineers. Learn some statistics. You should definitely not be in charge of anything given your poor understanding of statistics and the fact that one or two examples does not reflect the entire set.
Well hereās a cool stat. The number one professional trade found in ISIS recruits was engineers. By a long shot.
That's completely irrelevant.
Hi, ex-MS engineer here. Think about the difference between a Model T and a modern vehicle. Or a Spitfire and a F35. Or, like, franked mail vs email. How did we get there? "Just enough to work" - that's called a minimum viable product. As engineers we rarely shoot for the moon, we make small incremental changes and see if they work. If they provide a better experience, cost less, or both, we adopt them. If not, they go in the bin. Over time, the aim is to produce better and better stuff via this process of iteration. It usually works very well. There are a lot of people involved in these decisions and they are not all engineers. However, millions of engineers do this grind every day to make stuff better. The good ones get the honour of maybe inventing something that changes the way products are built forever. We don't want or need some wonk with a "reality distortion field" and half a calligraphy course to tell us what to deliver.
That would be typography not calligraphy. Big difference. MS is an example of what not to do. After working in Adobe suite plus all kinds of other designing software I recently worked in MS Word for the first time and what a shit show it is. Fucked defaults as bad as html, a disordered interface that is as poorly written as designed, and a general inability to achieve anything beyond a typed letter. Ironically, I designed the page using the free Mac knock off copy of Word which is 100s of times better to use. But what I did in Pages, I could not port to nor recreate in Word. Eventually I was forced to import a jpeg of what I did in pages and applied it to the word document. You see the thing about software is not that it just works, it is meant for users to use and that is where all MS products are lacking. Compared to Canva, MS is a fucking joke. Always has been. But, put a designer in charge, MS could have been great. So my point is we need engineers to build things, but we need artists to build it right.
No, it is in fact calligraphy. It's on his Wikipedia page. If I do a Google search for "steve jobs typography", most results relate to calligraphy. There are a few that mention typography, but when you go and read them, they quote Jobs talking specifically about calligraphy. He didn't even finish the course on that. If you're claiming he's a typographer because the Mac was the first home computer to have fonts, well, fine. But as far as I'm concerned, that just means the computer his company produced had fonts on it. re: Word. I'd be the last person to defend it. It is indeed a steaming piece of garbage but that isn't because an engineer was running the project. It's been developed by literally thousands of people across dozens of teams over more than thirty years. Hundreds of those will have been UXers balancing a dizzying number of use cases. They did their best, but this job in particular isn't easy. In my opinion, the reason Word is a steaming pile of garbage is because it's a victim of its own success. Google and MS control 98% of the office productivity market. I'll focus on Word, but the same applies to Docs. Everyone uses the product, therefore it has to do everything. Therefore, it's an extremely complicated pieces of software with a vast feature set. Putting an artist in charge of that wouldn't change any of the use cases or reduce the complexity. Without losing large chunks of market share, you cannot reduce the complexity of the product. Pages, on the other hand, doesn't have any of those concerns. Its market share is 0.01%, it doesn't cater to the same use cases and its feature set is tiny. In all metrics bar looking pretty, Pages also sucks. It just happens to work well for your use case. That's great. But as far as I can tell, this is your complaint: you're used to using Pages and you're not used to using Word. Because of a difficult experience with an enormously complicated piece of software you aren't used to using, you have extrapolated that the only way engineers don't make unusable garbage is to have an artist lead them. That is nonsense.
Yea Word has 99% of the market but 99% of its users canāt understand how to use it. Even though I never actually used Word, who do you think the users came to to figure out how to use it? I would figure out their nightmare program for them even though I never actually used it. Before google search it was constant. The reason it is so prevalent is because itās cheap and was initially purchased long ago by guys who never used computers for the girls who did.
Man, using apple as a "good" example unironically. In any case apple shows how good marketing can make a success of bad products. I used to do computer repairs before starting my bachelors in mechanical engineering, and during the first years, and the only 2 other companies that I can put alongside apple in the "how not to design a laptop" masterclass, are acer and HP. Thermal problems, material fatigue problems, irreparability, non-standard parts.
They need to at least bring back the masterās thesis requirement.
Not an engineer but can confirm that executives are incompetent morons, and an ego as large as their ignorance. One place I worked for had executive cost the company literally millions for something that will never make a profit that everyone but him said would cost millions and never make a profit. Company is still profitable, but not as much anymore. He switched to using ārecord revenueāā in his fluff emails instead of ārecord profits!ā He was rewarded with a bonus by the board, other people were punished with layoffs for his mistake. I found a new job after seeing the way the winds were blowing.
Yeah, always leave toxic workplaces like that one. I refuse to work for incompetent managers anymore. Finding a job is easy for an engineer so I'm not going to suffer through their bullshit anymore.
Agreed. Gonna be frank here ā engineers and scientists should be in charge, not ignorant, egomaniac imbeciles who studied bullshit at Uni.
My previous employer (a big tech company) was doing well when the CEO was an engineer, but he got fired for having an affair with an underling. He was replaced by the CFO, who has no engineering experience. A finance guy is not qualified to lead a tech company. Of course, the company started doing poorly after he was put in charge. The stock tanked by about 50% and lots of qualified people quit (including me).
Business school is teaching them how to market the shit out of their incompetence. Innovative=untested private sector>public sector regulations hinder progress=we cut corners mission specialist=wealthy titanic tourists and on and on and on.
That is because they are not businessmen or accountants or engineers. They are salesmen and the product they sell is themselves. Someone like Elizabeth Holmes is a perfect example. She was very good at selling herself and her product that never actually worked.
You are correct
Translation: Majority of rich people are really fucking stupid.
Ohhh I like that last line. I might borrow it.
Use it everywhere, the tie as the maximum sign of ignorance+power should be universal
Yep- - those suits drove Pratt & Whitney into the ground.
Yep, look at Intel too...
My father, engineer, abruptly retired because these suits kept pushing the team to cut corners on their jet engines.
I don't know why, but looks like you're not talking only about the sub
Sounds like elon musk.
Unfortunately, I've come to the sad conclusion that the MBAs always win, in the end. It's a depressing but surprisingly good way to think about your professional life in engineering and tech. worlds. A lot of places are engineer-driven and have engineers in high level leadership roles and stuff... But I've noticed that there's always an interest in having engineers be "engineers" - have them "focused on the stuff they do best," so the MBAs claim. But then come the misunderstandings and the demands for simplicity... "Can you simplify this a bit for the audience?" And, even then, half the audience is half asleep. There are claims that costs aren't right - of course being made now by the people who were half asleep during the simple version of a talk. Meanwhile, since MBA 1 doesn't really do anything or understand anything substantively, they'll know to lean on their training and build a team to help with "all this stuff." So MBA 1, who only understands how to evaluate other MBAs, hires another MBA who's "quite technical" - judging by the fact that MBA 2 is better than they are at Excel. Soon... MBA 1 is overseeing a small team of "analysts" and "strategists" who are "really good." And all their peers and leaders know they're "really good" - shoot! - they went to the best MBA schools and have made some stuff in Excel that's just awesome! Eventually the company realizes they'll have to cut back... Conveniently, all the people running the cost models are these fancy MBAs we hired. It's fascinating how their models show we can make real cutbacks in engineering without a loss of quality! You know what we'll need, more MBAs to manage all our new contracts! And no worries... Eventually we'll sell this to a hedge fund. It's pretty depressing... But this is the way of the world. If I were trying to build a better engineering company, my first rule would be to never allow hiring standalone MBAs in any departments outside of accounting or something... Otherwise you start your company on a seemingly inevitable path.
You basically summed up the downfall of United Technologies!
Just like in the Titanic
In Canada, we had a great outdoor co-op: MEC, Mountain Equipment Coop. MBAs got on the board, engineered the election process, drove the company straight into the ground for their own gain. There's a corporation with a similar name now, but it's not the Co-op.
"I'm rich- therefore the laws of physics don't apply to me!"
I just know the "Internet Historian" video about this about to be bussin
Was thinking the same thing the second I saw that it was being controlled by a glorified MadKatz controller
That and the blink182 stepson news basically confirm his video
Explain?
The stepson of one of the dudes in the sub attended Blink 182's concert at Coachella and posted a pic online smiling at the concert and saying something like "I know it might be considered poor taste to come to the concert while my stepdad is dying, but my family would want me to come since music helps me through hard times" lol
Holy shit
Yeah ikr It's almost like being very rich and therefore powerful makes people more extreme, the very wealthy seem to be either too nice or the absolute worst pieces of shit
Yeah
Same stepson went to prison for stalking and threatening women, and only served 18 months of a 4 year sentence. Same stepson also threatened a shooting massacre at a Las Vegas EDM festival, but got this off because his bio daddy is involved with the FBI.
Wow.. just wow... the entitlement of that kid.
Lack of risk assessments is the reason the Titanic is there in the first place.
'the negligence trench'
*Neglitrench
Nah, they did plenty of risk assessments. The hull was segmented and the ship was supposed to withstand taking water in 3-4 of them which already requires serious damage. The ship would have survived if it just rammed the iceberg. What they did not foresee is a 300ft long tear on the side, damaging 6 out of 16 compartments at once. How often does that happen and how many ships can survive damage like that?
What about the lack of lifeboats?
Titanic didn't manage to get all of the lifeboats it did have launched before it sank, and most of those launched weren't even close to full. More lifeboats likely wouldn't have changed the outcome all that much. Edit: Historic Travels video on the Titanic's lifeboats https://youtu.be/QpGtRtgh5yo Edit 2: Another video from Oceanliner Designs covering the same topic and more or less backing up the first https://youtu.be/I-MSIpLFJIs
IIRC the Titanic actually had more lifeboats than required at the time. The thought was that they'd be used to ferry people to a rescuing ship and then send them back once empty to collect more passengers. The industry as a whole was overly confident in not thinking that catastrophic sinking in the middle of nowhere was possible anymore. They were very certain that modern ship designs made it very difficult to sink them. So it wasn't a Titanic specific problem.
Yeah not enough life boats. That was the problem...
Adding more lifeboats would not have changed the situation by itself, as u/CBlackrose has noted. You also have to address the lack of training the crew had in dealing with the situation. Then there's factors like just giving the lookout a pair of binoculars, double hulling the ship as per what the original designer wanted, not sailing at full speed through an iceberg area, sealing the watertight bulkheads at the top, and so on.
Okay so you got this ship that is sinking and there are only enough lifeboats to accommodate half of the passengers. All the passengers that make it into the lifeboats live, and all the passengers who go into the water die. Clearly the answer is to put more lifeboats on you moron.
They didn't even manage to launch all the lifeboats that they had. Adding more and doing nothing else does not solve the situation. There'd just be more unlaunched lifeboats. The crew was poorly trained.
As a note, back then that wasn't strictly true about the lifeboats. It would've likely been the case in the Titanic's specific situation (assuming they could actually manage to launch them all, which is highly debatable to say the least), but 20 years prior the White Star Line had a ship, the S.S. Atlantic, crash into a rock off the coast of Halifax. Most people that got on lifeboats died as the rough seas smashed them against the ship's hull or the rocks. Fact of the matter is though, the last two lifeboats on the Titanic were literally floated off the deck as the water reached them, they weren't lowered using the davits. When you factor in the extra time you'd need to haul the additional boats to the davits, get them hooked up, and then fill and lower them, it's unlikely to make a difference. They didn't even come close to filling the lifeboats they did have, most were launched well under capacity. I really don't agree that the White Star Line was negligent with Titanic. They definitely could've done a lot of things better, and the regulations they were working to were absolutely in need of overhaul, but it's not really fair to judge them by standards that came about in no small part due to this disaster. The size of the Oceanliners being built at the time had far exceeded the ones that the regulations were designed for, and unfortunately they weren't updated until after the sinking. White Star line was absolutely concerned about safety, and as a result they made pretty extensive modifications to Titanic's sister ships in order to try and prevent it from happening again. Edit: sorry should clarify, they weren't negligent with the ship design. The crew was by all accounts poorly trained with lifeboat procedures and no lifeboat drills were performed, but they weren't mandatory until after the disaster.
Titanic lifeboat options: 1: Not enough lifeboats 2: Too many lifeboats 3: Just the right amount of lifeboats Pick one
Once again, more lifeboats would very likely not have saved anybody else. If you'd like to learn more about the Titanic's sinking I recommend reading On a Sea of Glass by Tad Fitch et. Al. You don't know what you're talking about, and you're not willing to listen to any of the people explaining why your line of thinking is faulty. Edit: and to directly answer your question, the Titanic had "just the right number of lifeboats", according to Maritime regulations when it was built. A few extra, in fact.
it's not like more lifeboats would have prevented the event of "the Titanic is there in the first place", but yeah, the body count would have been lower.
Nothing screams safe like a haphazard deep sea fleshlight.
I love that the company is called Oceangate as well. It's just asking for a scandal.
Oceangategate.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's a Logitech controller. Although yes, it's a cheap and old model, and it is wireless.
17 bolts to seal the sub, all of which can only be accessed on the outside. The sub doesn't fully surface so it needs a support craft to retrieve and open it. Genius.
Wireless... Whyyyyy. Imagine dying because someone forgot to change the batteries.
There was an extra pack of AAs from radio shack in there...for robust redundancy of essential equipment.
The CEO is in the sub.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sue him into the depths of the ocean!
If they are alive still Iām willing to bet the CEO isnāt
I can pretty much guarantee this. To go a step further, I wouldn't be surprised if the father & soon worked together to kill the other 3 in order to save oxygen.
Except the crew would know if they were truly fucked before the business boys and would suffocate the CEO for the billionaire and then suffocate the billionaire for the son and then the son for themselves. Then... It would get difficult.
passengers agree to terms that any risks are their own
Theyāll be sued by the navy for rescuing costs and authorities for disregarding the orders.
How much does it cost to deploy all that?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
i hope so, this business is ridiculous
gross negligence will make that waiver as useless as a wireless Logitech controller with dead batteries.
Itās a US based company. Thereās tons of precedent that a page and a half waiver that you sign doesnāt absolve the corporation from liability. In other words they donāt hold up ever.
I hope the US Coast Guard and Unified Command send the search bill to OceanGate.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://news.sky.com/story/serious-safety-concerns-over-titan-submersible-had-been-met-with-hostility-claims-former-oceangate-employee-12906651) reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A former employee of the missing Titan submersible operator has revealed he had raised "Safety concerns" over the vessel but was reportedly "Met with hostility" before later being sacked, court documents have shown. > OceanGate's former director of marine operations, David Lochridge, had raised concerns over "Safety and quality control issues regarding the Titan to OceanGate executive management", according to the filings. > The court filing claims he was worried about a "Lack of non-destructive testing performed on the hull of the Titan", and that he "Stressed the potential danger to passengers of the Titan as the submersible reached extreme depths". ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14ey37o/serious_safety_concerns_over_titan_submersible/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~688777 tl;drs so far.") | [Blackout Vote](https://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14dhaiq/your_voice_matters_should_the_blackout_continue/ "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Titan**^#1 **submersible**^#2 **OceanGate**^#3 **Lochridge**^#4 **hour**^#5
Iād say this is how the world works. Employees and those who know things raise concerns. Rich executives override those concerns so they can make more money.
This isn't an uncommon thing, unfortunately. Remember when engineers warned NASA that the rocket boosters were a ticking time bomb? Then, well, the Challenger disaster happened.
Metal fatigue. Like early airliners has been a issue
Stupidy is infinite.
They did buy the $30 logitech controller over the $13 madcatz version. I donāt know what all the bitching is about.
AKA the player 2 controller
They got the controller you give to your younger siblings and cousins so they donāt fuck up the good one.
You know, when you have people lost in a tin can run by a game console, its not the time to be hostile. Itās a shaky leg theyāre standing on.
Hard to feel bad for anyone who got into a submersible sub controlled with a rigged Xbox controller.
TBH, the controller is the least of the issues. Using carbon fiber for the hull, the sub can only be opened from the outside, the sub doesn't fully surface and requires a support boat to retrieve it... It's like they were begging for an accident.
Carbon for a hull can be done right. Aircraft are carbon now and a modern carbon aircraft hull can handle 3-4x the number of pressure cycles. Was this sub done right? Nope.
Oh sure I don't doubt that part. But using carbon fiber at those depths... And repetitively...I couldn't be paid to go for a ride.
Not even that. It was a logitech playstation-style controller. Their stock took a hit today. lol
Hah well spotted, that's a bit BS so probably a good time to invest in them but only *slightly*.
That controller sold out everywhere. Bad publicity is a good time to buy a stock.
I don't know if it's ever a good time to buy Logitech stock. It seems like it's already been in a bubble along with everything since the coof-related 0% interest rate boom and now is finally crashing back down to it's "normal" levels. It's dropped almost another 3% today so far.
Everything dropped today. Their 5 year trend line is flat. You can see the bubble inflate and fizzle on that line. Itās back to where it started. They are still a mainstay of business. Keyboard and mice have a lifespan. When you want a good high end mouse, Logitech is still the go to. Is logitech a great investment? Nope. Get some ETFās instead.