this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
417 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59219 readers
2836 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 178 points 3 months ago (49 children)

Since the story came out people fixated on "lol he used a shitty gaming controller" but really that is one of the least sketchy design choices in the entire rig. Why reinvent the wheel and make a custom set of controls that are realistically another huge expense and potential failure point, when off the shelf solutions exist for that component?

The corners that were cut are the ones involving the viewport/nose adhesion to the ships frame, and the structural integrity of the carbon fiber hull itself. They had test data suggesting it was a bad idea to engage in repeated dives with their design, and an even worse idea to operate at the depths they chose. They decided to ignore that.

[–] rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 69 points 3 months ago (12 children)

That doesn't explain why they used the wireless version of that Logitech instead of wired to control the thing they were literally inside.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 29 points 3 months ago (9 children)

To be fair, they're under water and sharks have been known to chew through electrical cables

[–] Tricky@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I suspect the wired cabling would be to control components inside the sub, not outside. And I say that only because it's unlikely that wireless signals would penetrate the sub walls.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 66 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes but with this sub the water was on the inside too

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (44 replies)