[just_steve_h]

[flagged]

[dang]

Please don't take HN threads into ideological flamewar hell. It's predictable and tedious, and usually turns nasty—as happened below.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[logicalmonster]

> The late CEO of OceanGate told David Pogue last fall, “at some point, safety is just pure waste.”

In and of itself, what is actually incorrect about that statement?

I think a lot of normal people are going to smugly harp on that statement, but in and of itself it seems perfectly reasonable to believe that there's a diminishing return to safety measures for anything at some point.

The issue with this sub thing seems to be that they made some really bad choices, including apparently having glass that wasn't rated for the actual depth they were going to, choosing a gaming controller that apparently had a history of wireless issues, and other dumb issues with the design of the sub.

[likeclockwork]

> > The late CEO of OceanGate told David Pogue last fall, “at some point, safety is just pure waste.” > In and of itself, what is actually incorrect about that statement?

I mean, if we're going to take it out of context, sure... At SOME point it's a waste. That sounds correct to me.

In context: The fact that the person making the statement was crushed into a marble at the bottom of the ocean, along with his passengers, suggests that the point at which safety becomes waste was much later than he thought it was.

[_ea1k]

> In and of itself, what is actually incorrect about that statement?

+1- the statement as phrased seems to be correct.

The issue here seems to be one of dismissing legitimate safety concerns rather than that statement itself. They quit adding safety before they reached the "pure waste" point.

[elromulous]

It's waste the same way insurance* is waste. The difference between something certified and something not is exactly this instance, when the uncertified thing fails unexpectedly. The rest of the time, the difference is a "waste". Insurance is a waste until the accident happens and you get value from insurance.

*the general concept insurance, not the disaster that is US health insurance.

[watwut]

They were pretty far from that point when he said that.

[autoexec]

Because it's usually only others who suffer from their easily preventable fuck ups. They always love the government when it helps them personally. The underlying pathology is pure selfishness.

[hatsunearu]

this "scoffing at safety and regulation" shit being seen as "hip, cool and rebellious" and somehow a desirable trait is actually completely fucking bonkers to me.

Careful analysis and engineering to make things as safe as possible and well characterized is incredibly rewarding and satisfying.

[autoexec]

I agree with you, but I'll admit that I still think bike helmets and safety goggles look stupid. It's much cooler to be safe, but too often it's impossible to look cool while doing it.

[rsynnott]

There’s a Stewart Lee bit about old people equating health and safety with political correctness. Now on one level, it’s absurd; it’s a comedy bit. But there’s a point there; particularly for those on the extreme right, the very idea of being careful has become somewhat politicised. Some (and it is only some; there’s no _inherent_ requirement to act like this) right-libertarians disregard basic safety principles precisely because they consider them to be a creation of The Other Side.

(There's a bit of irony here; Conservatives aren't the conservatives, anymore...)

[p_j_w]

The EU economy appears perfectly functional to me.