The sub went missing while carrying five people to the wreckage of the Titanic.

  • Phanatik@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think the fact that the controller was wireless gets highlighted enough. Bluetooth devices have a hard time working above sea level and you’re expecting it to work 3800m below the surface. Delusional.

    • pjoter@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      BT devices got problems only when water is in between anetna1 and antena2. It does not matter at what altitude the devices are, just what is inbetween them.

        • GizmoLion@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well yes, if they use something in a way specifically contraindicated by the nature of the technology then that’s problematic.
          Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

          • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

            Don’t put on me your burden of proof.

            Well yes, if they use something in a way specifically contraindicated by the nature of the technology then that’s problematic.

            Well, turns out they did. So now that we have established that they don’t follow protocol, are you going to show us their design or are you going to reddit your way out of this conversation?

            • GizmoLion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Source that they did? I’ve seen nothing to support that to date.

              or are you going to reddit your way out of this conversation?
              Wtf? Was that an attempt at condescension?

              • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Source that they did? I’ve seen nothing to support that to date.

                That’s exactly my point, no one here has any source about the design. Why don’t YOU ask the people above about THEIR source?

                Do you have evidence that this was the case, or are you moving the goal posts to the “no shit sherlock” zone for an easy win?

                Don’t act surprised when I answer you the same way you answer me. Now either you bring some source to support the question that was made by someone above you or I’m done. I’m not your source magic machine.

                The person who started this chain of conversation is gone btw. I don’t know the point you are trying to make.

                • GizmoLion@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The guy above is correct, altitude has no effect on the BT transmission. You can assume they used the tech in a way it can’t (or nearly can’t) be used if you want, I guess. I’m not going to go and prove that they didn’t because that was your assertion, not mine. The vessel had many successful dives before this happened, so logic would dictate that the wireless implementation was working.

                  • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The guy above is correct, altitude has no effect on the BT transmission.

                    I never said otherwise and we both know it.

                    I’m not gonna play the reddit game with you. I have no burden of proof. Find another strawman to play with.

                    The vessel had many successful dives before this happened, so logic would dictate that the wireless implementation was working.

                    The designer is dead.

        • FlowVoid@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you want to command something in the water, you run a wire from that something to a receiver in the cabin.

          • GizmoLion@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, exactly. Or for a “sub” that only holds 5 people… maybe just spend the 10 cents and wire it lol.

            • FlowVoid@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I mean, the sub had reached Titanic several times, right?

              So even without the design documents, we know it was previously capable of operating at depth.

              Which we means we know the hull wasn’t made of cotton candy, we know it wasn’t propelled under water by an internal combustion engine, and we know it wasn’t controlled by a device that stops working in water.

        • SporkBomber@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s dealing with communication through the water. Presumably the controller wouldn’t have water between it and its receiver under ideal conditions.

        • iThinkergoiMac@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Your link is for wireless transmissions going through water. In this case, it’s still going through air.

          It’s not the altitude or depth that matters, it’s the medium through which the signal goes. It will work just fine, from a technical standpoint.

          That being said, wireless things are inherently unreliable compared to wired, and it’s stupid to make something so important not as reliable as possible.

          • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not the altitude or depth that matters, it’s the medium through which the signal goes. It will work just fine, from a technical standpoint.

            I know that. What makes you think that the other part was not in the water? Do you have any source for that?

              • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                aka “the easy way out”.

                You take for granted that the wireless was for inside equipment, I don’t. I asked if someone has a source about the design but no one brought anything. That’s where we are.

                You don’t need no attitude here, if you know something then write it and mention the source.

        • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well - how about out if the receiver is on the the hull - and the bluetooth signals don’t have to travel through any water?

          • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Maybe. And? Don’t overthink it, I’m answering to someone who boldly claimed:

            “OK. Explain why they would have more trouble working at that depth”

            and who is long gone btw.

              • PabloDiscobar@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well, I gave you a reason why it would cause problem, if the device piloted was out, in the water.

                Do you have a schematic of the sub? I don’t.

                • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Do you have a schematic of the sub? I don’t.

                  You were the one who called the decision to use Bluetooth “Delusional”. I’m the one who said we have no idea whether it was a good idea or not - so I think we can leave it here.

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Does higher air pressure affect Bluetooth signals?

      Also, buy better Bluetooth devices, I haven’t had to deal with disconnections with quality modern gear outside of battery issues. My first run steam controller hasn’t given me any issues with wireless connections while playing, and all of my headphones stay connected to the proper device even when I’m stupid far away (like, I left my phone in the car and I didn’t notice any drop in quality until after I entered the store).