Hacker News Reader

Comment by chrisseaton | Hacker News Reader

Do people on Hacker News genuinely think they’re able to come up with tractable ideas that wouldn’t be considered by the actual experts working on the problem?

This person wants to build a damn, someone else wants to use helicopters... waiting for other patronising armchair engineers to weigh in with other reasons why the experts have it wrong.

View on HN

Wow, that's harsh.

If I'd explain it as using cofferdams ( temporarily structures) to raise the water instead of the traditional lowering. Is that better for you?

I'm 100% sure that using simple solutions to hard problems is not always thought off when something is not used in it's "traditional" sense.

Sometimes outsiders give another POV that could be actually useful. And sometimes it isn't.

No need to get rude for that... Perhaps try some constructive feedback on why it shouldn't work next time? :)

PS. Before you misinterpret my words again. I'm saying that the concept is simple ( raising the water level), not the execution of it. Since on this scale every solution is harder to execute.

Edit: It's already been confirmed by another poster that it should work in theory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26587692 ( with pro's and cons)

Glad someone else said it... nothing like a bunch of software engineers assuming they're more qualified at major maritime salvage than actual experts.

Armchair engineers?

Yep.

Patronizing?

I never saw it that way.

I think most people suggesting helicopters (as an example) know they are probably not feasible but are curious as to why not.

> Patronizing?

Random person on internet confused about why professional engineers haven't taken note of the idea they just came up with. It's either patronising or delusional - take your pick.

Or perhaps the wording was off as their (my) reason to copy-paste most if it from something they wrote a minute before that on another and highly relevant thread.

Take your pick.

+ It does work: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wuVxvQh9Khy7xdIpgCNfVAdo4Dq... ^^ and without some downsides i read first ( eg. keeping the balance of the ship or putting additional stress on the structure of the ship)

Just interested in what the problems and potential solutions are on that scale.

You ought to relax a bit. You could, theoretically, just let some random people on a techy forum geek out about disasters and engineering. Since no one is listening to us except ourselves, exactly what do you hope your scolding will accompish?

Or just bored and seek dialogue?

Conclusion: Both aren't delusional and seem to be possible - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26587459

But hey, thanks for your valuable feedback.

But the parent comment was pretty gently put. I didn't read it as armchair criticism, but rather more wondering aloud. The idea of cofferdamming the ship is entirely feasible, and I too am curious about how it compares to other interventions in terms of time and effort.

Link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26587692

> He said it works in theory.

> He didn't estimate timeline, but it would take longer than a weight/crane operation. If the situation was much worse (partial capsize, somehow deeper entrenched on the coast), this might be a more plausible option. With the containers in an accessible location, it should be faster to organize a weight redistribution campaign instead. Just thinking about the logistics of safely building and deconstructing the dam made his head spin a little bit.

Remember elon's cave sumbarine :D

"That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me!"

- Spengler in Ghostbusters

Reply on news.ycombinator.com