• Iapar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 years ago

    Interesting. What has ja rule say to this?

  • Move to lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    49
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Nah. Let the rich morons off themselves.

    I am calling for even fewer regulations. Negative regulations.

  • partial_accumen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    282 years ago

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

    • @Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -12 years ago

        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.

    • livus
      link
      fedilink
      15
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      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.

    • @mercano@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      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@citizensgaming.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      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.

    • Something Burger 🍔
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 years ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        152 years ago

        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.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 years ago

    “And, by the way, watch Avatar: The Way of the Water today on Disney+!”

  • 👁️👄👁️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    72 years ago

    At this rate, I can see a billionaire stepping on a lego and saying legos need to be regulated.

    • @IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      There are plenty of mutually agreed upon international regulations that ships, aircraft, etc. all abide by. It’s not rocket science (well there’s that too).

    • jkmooney
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      I work in aviation regulatory law but, a friend of mine does work in this arena. I did ask him if my analog existed in the nautical world and he was able to walk me through how he’d managed to avoid any regulatory oversight. There’s SOLAS but, other than that, it’s a gap that apparently needs to be closed.

      • @Landmammals@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        I’m not a lawyer, but it seems like the subs only operate in international waters. The ships carrying these deep sea submersibles dock at ports, but the subs themselves are cargo until you get out into the middle of nowhere.

    • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      The port from which they launch and the country where the company is registered.

      If it’s all done incognito and they fuck up then too bad.

    • @IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 years ago

      He’s extremely knowledgeable about submersibles. He helped design and build the Deepsea Challenger, which he then took to the bottom of Challenger Deep, the deepest known location on the planet. He’s one of two people to have done that.

      He has a ton more experience on top of that. I’ll leave it up to you to go learn about it if you can be bothered to do so.

      • @BurtReynoldsMustache@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        This is true. HOWEVER, he’s only opening his mouth to push for legislation on this because he doesn’t want any more of his asshole billionaire friends to die. This isn’t out of altruism for the average Joe… because let’s face it, how many folks do you know who can afford a trip like that?

    • jkmooney
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      I don’t know, I’m an aircraft structural engineer and, based upon what technical commentary I did hear him make, it kinda sounds to me like he knows what he’s talking about.

      • @Coreidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -42 years ago

        ROFL. Love James Cameron much? Stop idolizing celebrities ffs. I think you’re the one that needs to touch grass instead of caring about what some boomer thinks.

  • FuglyDuck
    link
    fedilink
    English
    332 years ago

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

    • jkmooney
      link
      fedilink
      262 years ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        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@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 years ago

        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.

        • @Skavargen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          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.

  • @foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    252 years ago

    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.

    • @Silverstrings@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

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

    • @cmbabul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      182 years ago

      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@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      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.