Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
In Victorian times fiction like Jules Verne's novels and the like, rich yachtsmen saving the day is kind of a trope. What I'm trying to say is that the previous iteration of super rich fucks had some kind of heroic idea of themselves, some kind of noblesse oblige. These cunts are just cunts.
For some cases, actual noblesse were also the government and they lived among the people. They also took pride in the family image because it was political capital. It surely wasn't perfect but it wasn't as bad as the US and their glorified cupidity.
Probably the past ones are just fiction as well. Probably they always ignored pleas for help. But they paid for writers to say differently. Or just lied about it.
You're right. And our ruling class can probably point out to the absolute amount of money they spend on their foundations of choice to say they are even more charitable than the Victorians. Ugh.
Ah yes, the generation of super rich fucks who were happy to have children mangled in the machinery of their textile factories had "noblesse oblige."
had some kind of heroic idea of themselves
Reading is hard
Because basic human decency have no ROI for them, duh.
They declined because he doesn't care about anyone but himself. Simple enough when you approach all his actions from this point of view they become predictable.
I believe that by international law all vessels have to offer assistance to someone in distress.
That is why you have a captain to toss under the bus when rich enough.
Ultimately the captain is responsible and should face consequences.
And this is the flaw, they pay them a lot to take the fall as part of the job. Plenty will do so with a smile on their faces and international law and decency suffers.
Agreed, this is definitely what happened. There is probably also a sense of being able to do anything you like since your boss is rich.
Not just a sense, a very real ability. This might mean they can't captain a ship anymore, but unlikely to see any real punishment.
You're correct about this. I was just looking it up myself.
There is indeed international maritime law governing vessels, and they must proceed with all possible haste to distress signals. Unfortunately, there are two problems here as I understand the situation:
Zuckerberg's yachtfucks apparently said that they noticed the distress signal eventually, but by the time they had, the Coast Guard had already arranged assistance for the skiff.
So, sadly, for those of us who want to see the billionaires get their comeuppances, I don't think we'll see it here.
Fines for billionaires should START at $1 billion dollars, and that's for a speeding or jaywalking ticket. Something like this should be a $50 billion dollar fine, for each time the call was ignored.
And whoever made the decision to ignore the call goes to prison. If Zuckerfuck himself made the decision, then it's 10 years in prison, and the confiscation of all his yacht, and he will never be allowed to own a water raft ever again. No yachts for you, after you get out of jail in 10 years.
Or, put him on his yacht, blow a hole in the hull, and ignore his pleas for help. Let him figure it out like he made others do, when he ignored their calls for help. See how he likes it in the shark infested ocean.
As a sailor (the recreational kind and former Navy) I find this particularily vile. In my experience, all boats, whether large or small, cheap or expensive, recreational or commercial stop everything they are doing when there's a distress call vaguely in their vicinity. At the very least everyone is turning up their radio to monitor what is happening and having dedicated personell whatching the seas for the distraught vessel or event. It is espescially true if you have the equipment, the men power, the time and the money to spare going above and beyond.
In my oppinion aiding those in need at sea is the most basic and fundamental thing to do as a sailor. Those sailors that comply with orders not to help should never ever be allowed on a ship again. Despicable pieces of shit.
In my o~~p~~pinion aiding those in need ~~at sea~~ is the most basic and fundamental thing to do ~~as a sailor.~~
So, you might know þe answer to þis: I've always believed þat it was illegal for captains to ignore distress signals at sea. Is þat not true?
It is.
How serious is þe offense? Is it ever enforced, or is it so hard to prove it's more of a guideline?
They always face questions, but never consequences…
What about a 10 million dollar fee after they made billions of dollars?
In a case like this where he wasn't there, to face consequences you would have to prove he actually instructed the ship's master to ignore distress calls. To establish that... you gotta ask questions.
Mark Zuckerberg has faced questions over why a small cruise ship in south-east Alaska rescued a stranded skiff and its crew when his 387ft superyacht had been closer.
The Silicon Valley billionaire’s yacht, worth a reported $300m, is said to have “repeatedly” declined to assist when a nearby boat called for help last week.
Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook and Instagram owner Meta Platforms, was not onboard at the time, a spokesperson told Forbes.
So, basically, it starts to look like they have standing orders to be selfish and anti-social to point of pushing up against maritime law.
Why wouldn't they? The investigatory agency for this is the USCG, and last I recall, the man in charge of Homeland Security and the rest of the US is pretty comfy with doing favors for his billionaire friends.
ewwwwww poor people on the starboard side of the yacht
why would a android, let an "organic lifeform" taint his "perfection.
The answer: He's an evil piece of shit.
Stop to help and do what? He isn't a boat doctor who can fix their boat for them. And he can't let the poors on his superyacht, they'd sour the champagne.
EGADS! The effervescence has left my champagne! Throw those poors back in the water before my grape skins thicken.
It depends on the nature of the emergency. If the boat isn’t in danger of sinking, (maybe a dead engine and only emergency power), the working vessel has to hold position near the distressed one so the coast guard (or whatever rescue operation gets dispatched) can find them easier.
Especially since emergency power is on batteries, which means the distress call is essentially on a timer. It’s the working vessel’s job to maintain visual contact with the distressed vessel, to act as a relay and ensure they can still be located even if the distressed vessel goes completely dark.
If the distressed ship is in imminent danger of sinking, then the working ship would potentially perform a rescue operation to get people off the sinking ship. It could be as simple as casting out life preservers for the occupants to be dragged over to the working ship. This is more of a judgement call, as the working ship won’t want to put themselves in danger of sinking too. So the nature of the rescue will depend on why the distressed ship is in distress. But regardless, the working ship wouldn’t just ignore it.
But regardless, the working ship wouldn’t just ignore it.
It did tho. What are they going to do about it? Ask him questions? lol. They can fine him another $500 million and that and the last $500m for knowingly harming the mental health of kids would work out to about what he spent on that stupid Metaverse cartoon of himself.
Well it’s simple. Its because he’s a prick.
The reply? Because I didn't want the poors on my yacht.
He is a disgusting parasite PoS -- also an acceptable answer.
Like what kind of fucking trash do you have to be? It's a floating luxury palace, I'm sure it has a helicopter aboard it. He's in no rush, all the money in the world, and with the opportunity comes up to be a good person, he not only refused to help once, but repeatedly.
The captain should be stripped of their license and he should be unable to own or operate a boat within American waters. Better yet, make him pay 250 million to park it in a US harbor, and spring it on him with the boat has no choice but to dock and refuel in the US.
"but what if they get their poor all over my boat!?"
Most likely a tech failure. /s
Because the personality disorder required to exploit enough people to become a billionaire causes them to lose their humanity and end up with no empathy?
No. I don't believe this. The power causes the disorder. So, they start small, like Bezos, and Zuck, and Gates, but as they become more successful apathy increases. The two grow in tandem, and it can happen to anyone.
Have you not see this yourself? At work when someone is promoted from the ranks, and they change?
Power corrupts, and it corrupts anyone who gains it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Sink more yachts.
His yacht has a dingy as you can see at the stern.
Yachts of this size not only have dinghys they have full-size motor yachts serving as tenders.
$5 says there were kids on his boat
I'll rescind this when the impartial 3rd party investigation says otherwise