Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
But not half as much fun.Laxatives work better than a spoon.
But not half as much fun.Laxatives work better than a spoon.
The pilot / ceo seems a bit of a Captain Redbeard Rum type so has probably been drinking his urine since they set sailWater water everywhere, Nor any drop to drink.
Even if they were to find it I don't see any mention of a way to get oxygen into the craft on the deep ocean floor or that anyone has a sub-grabbing claw on a several km-long chain to haul it up.
Up the stakes and try using a fork.But not half as much fun.
Urine drinking buys you another two days maximum. But that might make the difference.The pilot / ceo seems a bit of a Captain Redbeard Rum type so has probably been drinking his urine since they set sail
I don’t think that’s hard. Where there’s hope of life there should be every effort*. This is about liability for responsibility after that point. I don’t think the passengers estates should be sued, because they’re just people who made a bad choice. That’s different from operating a business based on a cascade of bad choices.I agree with you about this as a public policy issues, yes, it would be very difficult to say who gets help/who doesn't, who gets the bill etc. But in terms of how the story should be framed and discussed, my mind goes to tales of pissed/drugged up blokes who have to be rescued from mountainsides and the shellacking they get in the media... and to stretch the analogy, a company that might organise such pissed up, dangerous 'adventures', maybe with an added libertarian twist that 'nobody can tell us what to do'. Even though it's sad that these people have died - fucking awful for their families - it feels like the media narrative should be something similar. Pedantically, not an exact match, but still a case of tragic misadventure, a shockingly lax company and a few punters who, tbh, probably should have known better.
Urine drinking buys you another two days maximum. But that might make the difference.
Of course yes. There has to be a legal process. I wasn’t suggesting there shouldn’t be.
I don’t think the migrants are responsible for the same reason the passengers here shouldn’t be blamed - they were just the passengers, and in both cases what various people on land think of their decisions and why they think it isn’t actually relevant. Those who operated the vessels/took profit/incurred costs/cut corners resulting in loss of life should certainly be liable in both cases.
Ones own. Obviously if you have access to other people's urine it could help for more than two days. I suppose if they forced the ceo to do a big wee before killing him it might give them an extra few hours but generally dead people don't pee after the initial relaxing of muscles at death. I suppose if they just killed him without collecting the wee first they could suck it out of his clothing.As ever, ones own, or secret Santa, or homogenised?
No, never that. Every effort and consequence should be explored, apart from that. That’s my clear ethical line.Well that's the problem with your assertion that all business should have to pay the costs. The subjectivity (you don't believe that migrants/passengers are to blame but many others will), the process that in many cases will take years and some firms will have deeper pockets for legal representation than others. Again, I agree that it should happen somehow but the extension is that negligent individuals should also be held accountable and what do you do when they can't be? Stop providing services to the likes of mountain climbers, pot-holers, scuba divers etc?
Hang on... I'll get back to you in 5 minutes.Up the stakes and try using a fork.
No one has said that. Stop making things up.
Why blame the French.David Miliband runs International Rescue these daysBreaking news!
A state of the art undersea vessel from France means that they have gone from no hope to no hope.
It their case it wasn't the hope that killed them.
RIP
If you ever stop making things up, like you did, then I will do. Sadly, I don't think that will be happening soon as you can't tell the difference between fiction and reality.Shut up, Bellend!
My god, so he does!Why blame the French.David Miliband runs International Rescue these days
If you ever stop making things up, like you did, then I will do.
Oh dear. One of your many problems is that you can't tell the difference between 'some' and 'all'. They're not the same thing. Only you used the word 'all'. Tanya gave an example of where it could be applied (ie, in this really fucking obvious case). So, you are either a fucking idiot (which I think everyone can agree with) or just a bad liar (entirely plausible). Either way, not a great look even for you.Begone, halfwit!
It's been quoted twice now and discussed with the person who made the assertion. As ever, you are not required
You can pretty much go to sea in an uncertified bath tub if you wish, and it's not clear that a flag or coastal state can interfere.In terms of liability, there's going to be an issue over Canada...
The support ship, from which this contraption is launched, is both Canadian flagged, and this particular sortie sailed from St Johns, Newfoundland - that makes its seaworthiness a matter for the Canadian government.
The submersible is uncertificated, and the people on board signed waivers (I mean there's a fucking massive red flag to start with), but the Canadian maritime authorities knew about this vessel, and knew there was a reason it was uncertificated - there's going to be a hell of a court fight over whether Canada was negligent in not impounding a vessel, used for commercial purposes, that it knew/suspected was unsafe. It happens to fishing boats all the time, so why not this?
I'd be stunned if theres not a significant amount of chat about this vessel within the Canadian coastguard/maritime authorities email server - and it's going to go wild when the lawyers for a couple of billionaires estates get involved.
laxatives can work better than a spoon, but not necessarily. i have a pal who routinely inserts a digit up his own anus, wiggles it about for a while , until dump is produced. He says it is not an unpleasurable operation, just a bit inconvenient. He is in his mid 80s, but shitting doesn't stop in middle age does it.Laxatives work better than a spoon.
<fart, belch, piffle>
You can pretty much go to sea in an uncertified bath tub if you wish, and it's not clear that a flag or coastal state can interfere.
The Canadian mother ship has to meet IMO requirements, including things like SOLAS (the safety at life at sea treaty) and MARPOL (the marine pollution treaty).
The submarine is not required to comply with any legislatory requirements when it's outside territorial waters, due to its size, and the fact it is not undertaking international voyages under its own power, and it's carrying fewer than 12 passengers.
For manned submersibles, it is possible to get them classed by an international classification society, like Lloyd's Register. They have, or certainly used to have, rules for the construction of manned submersibles. These rules cover the pressure hull, critical electrical systems, stability and the like.
For things like the pressure hull, it is possible to have it certified under a pressure vessel code, such as those published by ASME. That would determine the safety factors for the design and test pressures required for the main hull, but would exclude everything else. From the press reports, the plexiglass dome sounds like it was certified for a lesser depth than the operating depth of the submersible.
As you say, millionaires tend to be very litigious cargo. I am sure there will be a lot of lawyers looking at this, and there may be insurers involved, but I would imagine the public liability side of things will be, can we say...watertight.
There's this one apparently already on the sceneEven if they were to find it I don't see any mention of a way to get oxygen into the craft on the deep ocean floor or that anyone has a sub-grabbing claw on a several km-long chain to haul it up.
A British submariner and equipment from a UK firm will help the search for the missing submersible
I mean, it's Urban, so unlikely.Everyone's getting on fine.
You wonder what goes throughs the head of the people owning the 2nd robot. "Can we borrow your super duper robot to save these jokers stranded in this sub" Even if the owners are thinking "For fuck's sake if they're not dead now they will before our robot gets there so why bother?"
But they can't come out and say that without getting a load of grief about it.