No actually

It was the lack of binoculars

Too dark to see it before it was too late

apparently it was a number of reasons https://www.history.com/news/why-did-the-titanic-sink

Binoculars wouldn't have saved the Titanic.

Standard practice at the time was for lookouts only to use binoculars to focus in on an object already spotted. Looking 'round at night, they still would've used the Mk. I eyeball, and even then, the conditions of the North Atlantic in that region are ripe for what's known as "cold mirages." Thus, they wouldn't have seen the 'berg even with binoculars.

Didn't the titanic also have a major design flaw too? That being the water tight baffles that run throughout a ship? In the case of a puncture, a ship is still able to remain afloat due to each baffle being completely water tight and even with one willing the ship is still buoyant enough to remain afloat. However, the titanic wasn't watertight as above each baffle, it wasn't a solid roof and the water just kept filling the hull.

yeah IIRC

The watertight bulkheads only went as high as E Deck, yes. Thus, as she sank, the water cascaded over the top of the forward bulkheads, dooming the ship. Of course, no matter the situation, the ideal option is to NOT run into anything. As Aristotle so rightly put it: "A collision at sea will ruin your entire day."

the ideal option might have been to go head on into it

That would've just crumpled the bow, and possibly sprung seams all over the ship. She would've sunk like a stone.

if they'd slowed down enough it woulda just been a bump

Remember, her hull was riveted, not welded. And the steel used in hull plating AND rivets was high-sulpher, brittle steel.

only the front thingy would have been yeeted

That's why the berg did as much damage as she did.

well nu cuz there were holes all across the front 5

Dude, I just said the brittle steel was _why_ the berg did as much damage as it did. If her hull was welded, *Titanic* wouldn't have sunk.

The core lesson of the *Titanic* disaster is cascading failure.

hurr durr big stronk

i.e., chains of failure; if any one thing had not occurred, or happened differently, the disaster would not have happened.

**sinks**

I recently found this video on Youtube which help explain the philosophy of Ayn Rand and Objectivism, It is 2 hours long but it is actually really good, It is officially supposed to explain Bioshock but they link in Objectivism quite a lot because of the similarities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn_q-t8MrHo

@Goodwood of Dank™ Hence the reason why we use the Titanic as a reference to the European union, or anything with several flaws .

```I was paying attention to:

The core lesson of the Titanic disaster is cascading failure```

But I can't help but laugh because people actually debated my metaphor! And although I am profound and always up for a good bit of banter . It was pure art reading the discussion of how the Titanic sunk. Its like all those fans of the film . Arguing the ending . Its going to sink ... This is pointless!

Heh. I'm just really interested in the subject, have been since I was a kid.

@The Electric Lizard thank you because I really want to see if we can deeply use objectivism.

@Goodwood of Dank™ yes, but there were many faults and many reasons why it happened. It was a tragic reminder of watching out for great things, and take pride in your work.

Yep.

@The Electric Lizard ooh i love bioshock too in that way. If you look closely, andrew ryan is inspired by Max sternir (egoism/anarchism/radical individualism) and is somewhat of an ancap too. I really loved seeing references from all kinds of books and individuals relating to this in the game.

_
Also if your interest in materialism especially bioshock's kind i really recommend "god & state" by bakunin if i remember there was a chapter about it. It's well written and rather unique.

The core lesson of the Titanic is to not sail with people who oppose the federal reserve

@The Electric Lizard the whole reason why I mentioned it, wasn't just because of Rand. It takes time to respect that other's need what we need. I would call those selfish pursuits , personal gains. So, I am already perfecting her interpretation of it.

This is why I am saying the people around you, if they are not on your wavelength or compatible to you. You have no reason being in their space. And people whom are comparable to you, need to be in your life.
I got this in two minutes.

But, no we cannot evolve unless the balance in our own lives is reached to the maximum comfortability . We will then accept change. Whether it be, electric cars , different modes of transport, different types of jobs. We won't accept that until everyone else around us is comfortable with the change.

https://youtu.be/asery3UeBj4

I've recently had a civilized debate on the internets. Since those are rare I thought I'll post it here, maybe someone will find it interesting.
The debate was on whether US detention camps should be called "concentration camps".
My conclusion after the debate is that people know extremely little about Nazi concentration camps. To the point of not doing basic googling.
I think that making a fair and neutral video about the subject might have a big impact on the debates happening currently online online.
I'll paste the debate below (names changed ofc). Also if anybody knows how to post a long text in a open/close box please PM me and I'll edit it (or mods feel free, I'm new to this discord thing).

@Wlosy would you prefer Gulags or concerntration camp's?

ME
The phrase "concentration camps" is associated with Nazi death/labor camps. Comparisons detention camps in US to concentration camps makes Nazism appear less evil that it was. It is irresponsible and dangerous. Of course we should be vigilant and make sure that people in those camps don't suffer unnecessarily. Unfortunately with so many people crossing the border illegally it is impossible to clear and identify them, thus detention camps are necessary. You can not allow criminals to pass thru. Also for those seeking economic opportunities there is a legal process that was set up for a reason. Nazis were normal people and we must be vigilant not to become what Germans became under Hitler. But for that it is necessary to clearly define what Nazism is. USA in not Nazi Germany, and enforcing borders does not make you a Nazi.

Interlocutor
ME I don’t know how anyone can look at pictures of those people packed into those tiny spaces on the US border, standing room only for weeks on end, and not call them concentration camps. Just think about it - standing room only for forty days. No shower. That’s not humane immigration detention. That’s a concentration camp. At what point does ‘never again’ kick in, from your perspective?

ME
@DebaterWe have German concentration camps here in Poland. They serve as a memento. There are piles of shoes three grown man high, piles of children toys one man high, piles of glasses go roughly to your belly button but they are quite wide. Those people are dead. They were gassed, burned, shot, experimented on, worked to death or simply starved. You can see pictures from when the camps were liberated. Ditches filled with bodies, large ditches, with many layers of bodies. The bodies are naked but you can't really tell their sex, they don't look like human bodies. They all look the same, skeletons with human skin stretched over them. You can go and see for yourself. Hell you can google "Nazi concentration camps" or "Auschwitz bodies" right now and not leave the safety of your desk. When people google "migrant concentration camps" and see normal people, with normal bodies they might think that what the Nazis did wasn't all that bad. You don't see a distinction. It's reasonable to assume there will be others. They won't learn from history, they'll learn from your YouTube comments. If you don't learn from history it WILL happen again.

Interlocutor
ME But what you speak of are death camps. Thus far the untimely deaths in the US camps - those that would not have happened in humane immigration detention - have been a consequence of neglect AND concentration. Not deliberate, as far as we know, yet. That’s why I say they are concentration rather than death camps. If we don’t say never again during the first stages of what we’ve seen before in history, when do we? After the deliberate deaths start? If so, never again has no meaning.

ME
​@Interlocutor There are great and many differences between Nazi concentration camps and american detention camps. We start by learning what they are. What the Nazis were. What they did. We have to do this to know when to say "never again". Erasing those differences will make it easier to repeat Nazi concentration camps.
It's evil.
So far there are no US policies naming illegal migrants vermin, calling to use them as labor, exterminate them or even cause them any deliberate harm. Crying wolf now - when the only policy is to deport illegal migrants will only desensitize people to the words Nazi or concentration camp. And if god forbid those atrocities happen again those words will fall on deaf ears. What you do makes that the word "Nazi" have no meaning.

Interlocutor
ME I wholly disagreed, believing that it is ignoring the similarities, rather than the differences in the lead-up that is most likely to allow the repetition of an atrocity. The current US regime is not even trying to humanely process these peoples’ applications. They are being warehoused to produce cruelty porn. Which is being used to satisfy the basest instincts in the basest of political bases. And as a deterrent. The root word of deterrent is ter. Same as terrorism.

ME
@DebaterWell then i guess I wont convince You. I understand you want to do good now. I'm afraid You might be contributing to great harm and evil in the future. And i cannot stand with You. I can only say this. Find one unique similarity between Us detention centers and Nazi concentration camps. And then try to disprove it. If it appears in detention centers in for example Israel or other countries, then its not unique and comparison to Nazi concentration camps is wrong. If you find one that is unique you'll be able to convince me and many others. But examine it carefully, because You can be sure others will do so.

Interlocutor
ME Appalling conditions and poor nutrition are two similarities. As mentioned in this vid.
And I can’t even count the differences between what’s happening on the US border and humane, sanitary, expeditious immigration detention. (Because I’ve worked in a related area in my own country and would be breaching code of conduct if I did it thoroughly.)

ME
@DebaterSqualor, appalling conditions and poor nutrition are not evidence that america is running Nazi style concentration camps. Those things may be alarming in america but they are common around the world. When I type squalor in google images in the first set of images I get: a detention centers in Italy, Skid Row in LA and some street in San Francisco.
Those images are far worse then the ones i get for the search "squalor migrant detention". And even those are nothing like the pictures when i type "nazi concentration camps". Calling those detention centers concentration camps like the ones in Nazi Germany seems like skipping a few steps. I would agree that staying in a US detention center is an unpleasant experience. For those who are escaping prosecution or a disaster in their own county they are an improvement, judging by what i can find on google. For those that are illegal migrants they choose them over staying home.
Actually because of our talk i did some research. I can't find any pictures of atrocities in US detention camps. I can find articles describing them, but the pictures for "squalor migrant detention" are very similar to when I type "airport people sleeping", minus the fences.

This channel is called debates, not walls of text <:smugon:512048583806025739>

Even **I** am not willing to read that wall'o'text

RIP

Sure your right