[HN Gopher] Ghost boat with GPS leads father-son duo to man over...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ghost boat with GPS leads father-son duo to man overboard
        
       Author : hnburnsy
       Score  : 326 points
       Date   : 2023-02-05 15:47 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.garmin.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.garmin.com)
        
       | djmips wrote:
       | Good job tricking me into reading a Readers Digest -Drama in real
       | life / Garmin advertisement...
        
         | gscott wrote:
         | The moral of the story is to pee in a cup
        
           | johtso wrote:
           | getting used to peeing in bottles might just save your life
           | one day
        
           | cm2187 wrote:
           | Or at least to stop the engine while you pee
        
             | benatkin wrote:
             | Or at least put your life jacket and lanyard back on.
        
       | killjoywashere wrote:
       | The young rescuer, Jack, is a Math major at the Naval Academy!
        
       | ruph123 wrote:
       | I am no boat person at all but would it not make sense to have
       | keys that only allow you to drive the boat if you are close by
       | like in modern cars? And when you fall off, it just stops a few
       | meters away from you. I know these small boats are probably more
       | simple and the transponders would need to be water proof, etc.
       | but the benefit could be huge.
        
         | googlryas wrote:
         | They have wireless lanyards to do just that. But, currents and
         | wind pressure are just as likely to push the boat away from you
         | faster than you can swim if you're overboard.
        
         | Gracana wrote:
         | Could be a good idea for small boats in some cases. Jet skis do
         | tend to have kill switch tethers.
        
         | bjyule wrote:
         | Boats small enough to be operated by a single person are
         | required by law (I believe) to be fitted with a kill switch
         | that is supposed to be clipped onto the operator. In the event
         | they go overboard, the engine shuts off.
         | 
         | Of course in practice almost nobody actually uses these.
        
           | pancrufty wrote:
           | > Of course in practice almost nobody actually uses these.
           | 
           | The damn government can't tell me what to do.
           | 
           | Sigh, I see plenty of people driving with the seatbelt behind
           | them, which means they make the choice to ignore the advice.
           | Imagine _having to take action_ without being constantly told
           | to.
           | 
           | As other comments have mentioned, we're dumb.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Some deliberately do it out of principle, despite knowing
             | it's dumb. I have a family member who refuses to wear his
             | seat belt simply _because the government shouldn 't tell
             | him what to do_. He knows it's safer, and knows that he'll
             | get a ticket if he's pulled over, but won't do it, purely
             | out of this weird, dogmatic anti-authority.
             | 
             | In the field of aviation, they study aeronautical decision
             | making (ADM), and hazardous attitudes that prevent good
             | decision making. The FAA identified the so-called 5
             | Hazardous Attitudes[1], and number one on the list is
             | "Anti-authority". I wouldn't be surprised if this attitude
             | is causal of accidents and negligence in other activities
             | like boating and driving.
             | 
             | 1: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-
             | news/1999/september/...
        
               | userbinator wrote:
               | Given how the country was essentially founded by "anti-
               | authority" and still somewhat values freedom highly, it's
               | not so surprising. IMHO it's not a bad thing as long as
               | it's done in moderation.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lstodd wrote:
         | That's basically useless if there's any significant wind.
         | 
         | You won't be able to catch up to a drifting boat and board it
         | (the latter is quite a challenge in itself).
         | 
         | edit: just not go alone.
        
       | aerodog wrote:
       | "To me, that's divine intervention," Andrew said.
       | 
       | https://quran.com/17/67
       | 
       | "When you are touched with hardship at sea, you [?]totally[?]
       | forget all [?]the gods[?] you [?]normally[?] invoke, except Him.
       | But when He delivers you [?]safely[?] to shore, you turn away.
       | Humankind is ever ungrateful."
        
         | interfixus wrote:
         | If [?]He[?] will consider not letting all the grim stuff happen
         | in the first place, I will get cracking on my gratitude
         | project.
        
         | jollofricepeas wrote:
         | This is such a great quote to describe the human condition.
         | 
         | Tarantino should have used this for Pulp Fiction instead of
         | Ezekiel 25:17. It would have said so much more about the
         | character of Jules.
        
       | andylynch wrote:
       | This is a great story and endorsement of both Garmins's gear and
       | the people involved. The related article referenced at the end is
       | worthwhile too, not least for their theory about how the board
       | turned, a lot of things went right that day.
        
       | hansthehorse wrote:
       | I remember reading that 70% of the male bodies the coast guard
       | recovers have their zipper down. I frequently fish offshore alone
       | here in SE Florida and when I have to go I pee in an aft corner
       | and wash it down with the raw water hose.
        
         | kylehotchkiss wrote:
         | doesn't Home Depot or west marine sell a 5 gallon bucket sized
         | toilet? That might keep your boat cleaner especially if you get
         | hit by a rouge wave like right before you can rinse.
        
         | eschneider wrote:
         | Buckets are a thing.
        
           | glitcher wrote:
           | In my experience female passengers especially appreciate a
           | bucket with a privacy towel.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | blamazon wrote:
           | If you think about it, a boat is basically a bucket.
        
             | selimthegrim wrote:
             | Even Noah's ark was a waterproof round wicker basket
             | (coracle). Although good point, I never thought about what
             | they did with all the animal waste.
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | An imaginary waterproof round wicker basket, therefore
               | quite light and permeable.
        
               | blamazon wrote:
               | In modern times, livestock is regularly shipped en masse
               | from places with surplus arable land, like Australia, to
               | places with a dearth of arable land, like Saudi Arabia,
               | although I don't know what happens to the animal waste.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_export
               | 
               | Interesting tangent from reading that page, the 'Seagoing
               | Cowboys':
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagoing_cowboys
        
               | Symbiote wrote:
               | I think the animal waste is washed into the sea.
               | Presumably there are sumps on the deck and someone hoses
               | the deck (and animals!) with seawater.
               | 
               | > Using the table below, and assuming one million head of
               | cattle a year, 20 kilograms (44 pounds) of excrement per
               | head per day, an average voyage time of 10 days and
               | vessel loading and unloading times of five days,
               | something in the order of 300,000 tons of excrement is
               | pumped into the sea during these voyages each year. A
               | similar calculation for sheep, voyaging more typically
               | for 20 days, would add a further 85,000 tons.
               | 
               | > The excrement has a high water content and is
               | considered benign. It is treated like sewage under Marpol
               | Annex IV and doesn't need to be treated before dumping
               | far from shore.
               | 
               | https://maritime-executive.com/features/live-export-
               | followin...
        
             | pancrufty wrote:
             | Are you saying I should pee into the boat?
        
               | Laaas wrote:
               | A bucket can also be a boat.
        
         | kzrdude wrote:
         | It sounds like an offhand factoid (i.e a myth), just such a
         | typical thing that happily spreads.
        
       | chad_strategic wrote:
       | Say what you will...
       | 
       | Since I knew it was coming from garmin, I knew the mess I was
       | getting in.
       | 
       | Regardless of the mindless hype, the story is compelling as a
       | short story.
       | 
       | Everyone once in a while it's nice to read a mindless self
       | promotional piece in which humanity is on display. Sure beats a
       | personal insurance plan from some science denier quarterback?
        
         | netsharc wrote:
         | I didn't notice the domain, it only got me when I got to the
         | end of the sentence:
         | 
         | > The boat had a Garmin GPS marine system, and while Andrew
         | said he hadn't been familiar with Garmin units prior to that,
         | it was easy to use, allowing him to figure it out quickly.
        
       | raldi wrote:
       | Imagine being stuck overboard like this and then, after two and a
       | half hours, seeing _your own boat coming back to pick you up._
        
         | pksebben wrote:
         | ... or finish you off. It's become sentient! _swims away
         | furiously_
        
         | qup wrote:
         | Since I know how it left me, this would have me feeling a bit
         | uneasy.
        
       | zaroth wrote:
       | My first thought is a great safety feature would be a remote
       | engine cutoff you could wear when you are single-handed.
       | Something like what jet skis have but maybe Bluetooth?
       | (downthread: wireless lanyard)
       | 
       | Must have been absolutely terrifying watching the boat motor
       | away.
       | 
       | What a way to go, taking a piss off the side. I do it all the
       | time, but not 40 miles off shore!
       | 
       | If I'm sailing that far offshore the rule is you can't leave the
       | cockpit without a lifeline, if it's night and in daytime if
       | someone else isn't above deck watching you.
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | I've been sailing on a lake in a dinghy and a wind shift caused
         | the boom to knock me out of the boat, it was a terrible
         | feeling.
         | 
         | Lots of boats you have a safety line to keep you attached, but
         | the problem is that people tend not to use them.
        
           | SnowHill9902 wrote:
           | So what did you do? Evidently you didn't drown.
        
             | mynameisvlad wrote:
             | They were sailing so the dinghy presumably didn't promptly
             | drive away like in this story.
        
             | malandrew wrote:
             | Most sailing dinghys should have weather helm and will turn
             | up into the wind, causing the boat to end up in irons
             | (mainsail luffing and depowered)
        
         | malandrew wrote:
         | I know with sailing you want your boat to have weather helm so
         | it turns up into the wind and eventually ends up in irons, but
         | if you have autopilot engaged, you can't forget that. Do you
         | know if any of the newer autopilot systems will head up into
         | the wind if they lose contact with the remote that singlehanded
         | sailors will attach to their vest?
         | 
         | I've seen lots of videos of singlehanded sailors where they
         | aren't wearing tethers in nicer weather.
        
           | zaroth wrote:
           | My ancient autopilot certainly doesn't support it. Nor the
           | engine panel.
           | 
           | I've never worn a tether except at night in "blue water".
           | It's a bit of a stupid risk, but it's absolutely true the
           | most likely moment to go over is when standing right up on
           | the edge so you don't hit the boat when you relieve yourself!
           | 
           | In hindsight you're definitely gonna be wishing you just got
           | a little piss on the hull.
        
           | jzwinck wrote:
           | The main reason you want your boat to have a bit of
           | weatherhelm is because it makes the boat go faster upwind.
           | And just because you have slight weatherhelm at optimal
           | upwind trim does not mean the boat will fall into irons if
           | the helmsman goes away.
           | 
           | There are devices to shut off the autopilot for a MOB alarm,
           | but that won't stop the boat. And even if they did put the
           | boat head to wind or heave to, you can't swim fast enough to
           | catch even a drifting sailboat because it has so much more
           | windage than you.
        
         | StianOvrevage wrote:
         | I have this https://www.amazon.com/FELL-Marine-Wireless-Switch-
         | Basepack/... on my 23 foot day cruiser and I'm very happy with
         | it.
         | 
         | Sometimes cuts when I'm on the dock untying etc but could
         | probably be improved by adjusting the antennae orientation.
        
           | zaroth wrote:
           | Cutting off your control authority at the worst possible time
           | would definitely be the risk trade-off!
        
             | StianOvrevage wrote:
             | I agree that in general that would be something to avoid.
             | But in my case the probability * consequence math for the
             | usual scenarios is still fairly low.
             | 
             | When untying it only cuts once in a while when doing the
             | bow lines and I'm still attached at the stern, so no risk
             | there.
             | 
             | When preparing to dock it's only if I need to find and
             | prepare extra rope from some of the most aft compartments,
             | which I do well ahead of when I need them and not during
             | "critical phases of operation".
             | 
             | If I expect to be running around a lot during docking I
             | take the FOB off and place it on the dashboard. I don't
             | leave the helm unless the gear is in neutral, and if I fall
             | in the water I'm usually within 20 meters of land which I'm
             | fairly certain I'd be able to reach :)
        
       | sandworm101 wrote:
       | >> Sascha had gone to the side to relieve himself and simply fell
       | overboard. He'd reached for the railing to grab it on the way
       | down, but he missed. And that was it -- his boat sped away
       | without him, nearly 40 miles away from shore.
       | 
       | There is an old story told about how most drowning victims are
       | found with their fly open... drunk people peeing into the water
       | slip and fall into that water. I don't know anything about this
       | particular incident, but peeing off a dock or over the edge of a
       | boat is always dangerous. You are doing something very routine at
       | the point where land meets water. Even without alcohol/drugs,
       | overconfidence with a routine task quickly leads to big mistakes.
       | (I saw similar incidents with people who decided pee over the
       | edge of cliffs. Don't do that.)
        
         | DonHopkins wrote:
         | Also true of the tourist corpses fished out of the icy canals
         | of Amsterdam in winter.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | mozman wrote:
         | ... where should you pee?
        
           | blamazon wrote:
           | If you're alone and can't stop and don't have anything the
           | other commenters mentioned and your boat is fiberglass and in
           | good condition? Just pee inboard on the deck in a place with
           | good drainage and wash it off. Can't be much worse than the
           | droppings that birds provide.
           | 
           | But, personally in general I like the humble pee bottle. At
           | Walmart in the RV section they have the blue chemicals used
           | in portable toilets and plane lavatories and the like. You
           | can get it in a little tide pod format. Cuts the smell and
           | keeps things sterile. Drop that into any container
           | (preferably non-translucent and 2+ liters) add a little water
           | and you've got your own miniature portable toilet.
           | 
           | You can also buy a real portable toilet, they are quite nice
           | these days, but can be bulky. The keyword to find them is
           | "cartridge toilet" because typically the waste volume is a
           | container that is detached and carried to the dump point. I
           | once hiked 3 miles holding one of these portable toilets just
           | so I could take a dramatically scenic (and civilized) poop
           | and it was absolutely worth it.
        
             | jimnotgym wrote:
             | I think a bucket is more traditional...
        
             | sandworm101 wrote:
             | Or at least pee from behind a railing of some sort so that
             | when you slip you won't fall outside the boat.
        
           | yafbum wrote:
           | Bucket
           | 
           | Gatorade bottle (the dude even had his own supply according
           | to TFA)
           | 
           | Worst case, on deck near the drain holes, then wash it off
        
           | dzhiurgis wrote:
           | Cut a piece of plastic bottle to make a portable urinal
        
           | oh_my_goodness wrote:
           | Who is downvoting this? This is very literally the key life-
           | and-death question.
           | 
           | Too bad if there's some humor in it. You have to live with
           | that sometimes.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _where should you pee?_
           | 
           | The head. If there isn't one, give a buddy a heads up.
        
             | jacurtis wrote:
             | In this case there was no buddy either.
             | 
             | Really if you ever need to go the edge of the boat you
             | should be tied in. This is especially true with sailboats
             | since you often work at the edge of the boat doing things
             | like pulling lines or other actions where you can easily
             | lose balance or the boat can quickly shift.
             | 
             | If you are sailing in open water like this, miles from
             | shore, especially solo, you should be tying yourself
             | whenever you go to the edge of the boat. This is standard
             | equipment on most boats, a full-body harness (often
             | intergrated with an CO2 inflated life vest and water
             | activated beacon). There is a big industrial caribiner
             | style clip you clip onto the railing or similar with so
             | that if you fall overboard you can pull yourself back. The
             | rig is similar to what you would wear while roofing a
             | house.
             | 
             | This applies to all offshore boating, but if you are ever
             | boating solo, even more precaution should be taken to do
             | this.
        
           | wyldfire wrote:
           | Deactivate the propulsion before peeing. Maybe even drop
           | anchor? If you fall overboard you could probably get back
           | onboard.
        
             | sandworm101 wrote:
             | Anchors are only a thing very very close to land. Few boats
             | carry a thousand-foot anchor rope.
        
               | rationalist wrote:
               | Anchors do not need to touch the bottom of the ocean for
               | them to slow the watercraft down or reduce its drift.
               | Anchors are very much a thing far away from shore.
        
           | wiml wrote:
           | You should clip on. If you're moving around anywhere you
           | could possibly fall over, and you're alone or the water isn't
           | calm or you're far from shore or basically any other risk
           | factor, you clip yourself to the jacklines first.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _doing something very routine at the point where land meets
         | water_
         | 
         | Men are also doing something that typically requires two hands
         | on an unstable platform with limited visual cues for the
         | horizon.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | More serious answer. The drunk man's lean is a tale as old as
           | time. Get your zipper down, get situated, and your left arm
           | goes against the wall to stop the world from moving out from
           | under you. You should only need both hands for a moment. Less
           | if you've practiced.
           | 
           | Don't some boats have a tether to the power key, like
           | treadmills?
        
             | Mixtape wrote:
             | If my memory serves, every boat I've ever been on has had
             | one. In my experience though, it rarely gets used,
             | especially if the individual driving is also fishing. The
             | article states that Scheller was trolling at the time, so
             | he likely wanted to be able to leave the console and grab
             | his rod at a moment's notice. Reckless as it may be,
             | driving with the power key attached to the console in some
             | way rather than yourself makes that process faster and much
             | easier. It's a trade-off between convenience and safety
             | that, unfortunately, leads many to favor convenience a
             | majority of the time.
        
               | matthewdgreen wrote:
               | Seems like there should be some inexpensive way to
               | buy/built a BTLE "kill switch" that hooks onto your belt.
               | (And indeed a simple search turns up such a product for
               | about $200.)
        
               | sandworm101 wrote:
               | Killing the power can help in some situations, but
               | nowhere near all of them. A small boat moves very
               | differently than a person treading water. It drifts in
               | the wind. A swimmer doesn't. Even with the engine off,
               | there is a good chance that he wouldn't get back on. And
               | a one-foot wave isn't so small when your eyes are only a
               | couple inches above the water. You need a positive
               | connection between you and boat.
        
             | patja wrote:
             | The tethered dead man's cutoff is a norm on small
             | outboards. I seem to recall it is even a legal requirement
             | to use it in some jurisdictions (including clipping it to
             | the skipper's body). But on anything out in the ocean like
             | this with a larger outboard with a separate steering
             | station it is not something that is normal at all. There
             | are products that achieve the same outcome including
             | wearable beacons that will shut the motor off if you get
             | separated, but they are not common and a little expensive.
        
           | LarryMullins wrote:
           | > _requires two hands_
           | 
           | That's quite a humble brag!
        
             | mhb wrote:
             | Two guys are relieving themselves into a river.
             | 
             | First guy: Boy, that water is cold.
             | 
             | Second guy: And deep, too!
        
         | mmaunder wrote:
         | Usually told at the the start of a trip as the "harnesses
         | always on when solo on deck or at night" policy is explained to
         | crew.
        
       | beardog wrote:
       | >"We got done and they were like, 'OK, roger that, Captain,' and
       | I was waiting for them to say to go find them, but of course they
       | can't tell you to do that, so we were just like, 'OK. We'll go
       | find him.'"
       | 
       | Why can't the coast guard tell the first responder to try to find
       | them? As a layperson I thought civilian ships were often
       | coordinated with to help those in distress.
        
         | kylehotchkiss wrote:
         | Because if you tell some boating noob, they might not proceed
         | carefully enough to see a victim or they might multiply the
         | number of victims by making careless mistakes trying to be
         | heroes.
        
         | patja wrote:
         | It does seem a bit at odds with my experience monitoring VHF 16
         | while sailing. When someone is in distress or there is a report
         | of an unmanned kayak (extremely common!), the Coast Guard will
         | almost always put out a call for any mariners in the vicinity
         | to check it out, report back, and provide aid.
        
         | Zircom wrote:
         | As most weird things along those lines in America, I can almost
         | guarantee it's some sort of liability policy. They don't wanna
         | be held responsible if a civilian gets themselves
         | hurt/lost/killed trying to rescue someone, or does the same to
         | the person they're trying to rescue, having being asked to or
         | "ordered" by someone in a perceived position of authority like
         | a coast guard officer.
        
           | beardog wrote:
           | I was thinking it was comparable to CPR/first aid
           | instructions from 911 calls however seafaring is inherently
           | more risky...
        
             | netsharc wrote:
             | Makes me wonder if, in this age of Covid, 911 operators
             | would ask callers to perform CPR. Even a "Do you know how
             | to perform CPR" might be interpreted as an instruction to
             | do so.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | It makes a lot of sense to me in this case. As you suggest,
           | even a "if you don't mind" from the Coast Guard could very
           | reasonably be taken as a polite order which they may not have
           | the authority to do in this case.
           | 
           | >They don't wanna be held responsible if a civilian gets
           | themselves hurt/lost/killed trying to rescue someone,
           | 
           | That seems like a not unreasonable concern even if there was
           | probably no material danger in this case.
        
       | philip1209 wrote:
       | This video about the "algorithm" the Coast Guard uses to search
       | for missing mariners in moving water is pretty fascinating:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoXJfuPaFF8
        
       | yafbum wrote:
       | It's a great story but kind of gross the way Garmin slides in an
       | ad for its products being supposedly easy to use even for people
       | who haven't used them before
        
         | mvkel wrote:
         | It's on their own website. Can you blame them for promoting
         | their own product? Marketing isn't journalism.
        
           | yafbum wrote:
           | Here's a header that fixes it: "We at Garmin believe it's
           | essential for our products to be easy to use, and can be
           | lifesaving. Here's a story that illustrates it." Not hard to
           | add instead of starting it like your just going to tell a
           | story.
        
         | killjoywashere wrote:
         | What?! If you invented something that saved a life, you bet
         | your ass you'd be putting that on your company blog! Your post
         | is not in the spirit of HN.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | Anti advertising, anti big corporate and a negative slant on
           | a feel good-story? It's completely HN. It just lacks a more
           | efficient search pattern recommendation and a blockchain
           | reference. Turns our the guy treading water also used a very
           | calorie inefficient leg stroke too.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | Have we considered discussing what would happen on this
             | page if Javascript were to be disabled?
        
         | TheRealPomax wrote:
         | It's... on their site? Not sure I'd object to the company
         | publishing the story advertising for themselves. If NYT or WaPo
         | can go "nope, you've read enough, buy a subscription", Garmin
         | can unobtrusively go "hey thanks for reading, consider buying
         | something we make" =D
        
         | sitzkrieg wrote:
         | yea this was quite the heartstrings pulling ... advertisement
        
         | qup wrote:
         | When your easy-to-use interface saves a man's life, I think you
         | get a pass for one story.
        
           | mynameisvlad wrote:
           | Realistically, any GPS system would have done the same,
           | whether you have to touch a screen or push buttons.
           | 
           | Wayfinding is like one of the most basic of features on these
           | units.
        
             | alar44 wrote:
             | How dare a company advertise their features with an
             | interesting story! Get a grip.
        
               | mynameisvlad wrote:
               | Making the claim that somehow the magical interface of
               | the Garmin saved this man is preposterous.
               | 
               | It's a GPS unit. It's not some magical device that
               | pinpointed the person's exact position overboard and led
               | them right to it. They would have been able to do the
               | exact same thing on literally any other unit out there.
               | 
               | As I said in another comment, Garmin is certainly
               | entitled to post it but people are equally entitled to
               | point out the ridiculous and hamfisted advertising.
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | With one touch delete of GPS history, these two would be
             | heros sealed his fate while stumbling through our hierarchy
             | of menus.
             | 
             | Upon returning to civilization and entering their story in
             | the corporate bug tracker, their feature request was
             | denied, as better history retention is in the +Pro model.
        
               | mynameisvlad wrote:
               | Anybody that has dealt with a marine GPS units can handle
               | all of them. These aren't sophisticated interfaces and
               | the features they offer for the most part is
               | standardized. It's not like it controls a spaceship or
               | something, it's _just_ a GPS unit.
               | 
               | Would a random passerby potentially fuck things up?
               | Maybe, but realistically probably not. Would the guy that
               | just _jumped from moving boat to moving boat_? No, they
               | have obviously seen and used one of these before.
               | 
               | > Upon returning to civilization and entering their story
               | in the corporate bug tracker, their feature request was
               | denied, as better history retention is in the +Pro model.
               | 
               | Garmin, like practically every company out there, is well
               | known to hide features behind premium models. Not sure
               | exactly what point it is you're trying to make but Garmin
               | isn't a magical snowflake who doesn't partake in this
               | practice.
        
             | kylehotchkiss wrote:
             | Good luck trying to figure out how to do this on garmin's
             | handheld devices in a hurry!
        
         | gist wrote:
         | > but kind of gross the way Garmin slides in an ad for its
         | products
         | 
         | Gross? So we have a company that is in business to make money
         | and employs people and spends money at other companies (that
         | employ and give people jobs). And they can't do obvious
         | marketing. And take advantage of a good opportunity to plug
         | their product? Everybody and every company just has to be for
         | the common good? Be humble no bragging and the world will be a
         | path to your door?
        
           | mynameisvlad wrote:
           | They certainly can. And people are certainly able to comment
           | on how hamfisted the marketing is. Freedom of speech and all
           | that.
        
             | brewdad wrote:
             | It's a corporate blog. What do you expect them to write?
             | 
             | "The features of our GPS allowed a passerby to save an
             | overboard boater. Really any generic GPS unit from Walmart
             | would have done the same though."
        
               | mynameisvlad wrote:
               | As I said, they're certainly free to say whatever they
               | want to say. But people are free to criticize what they
               | chose to write.
               | 
               | A less hamfisted approach would, for instance, remove the
               | quotes from the guy which were clearly prompted by the PR
               | folks at Garmin.
        
         | beefman wrote:
         | A little tacky, but bad UI does have consequences. Garmin UIs
         | have always been fantastic in my experience.
        
         | gamblor956 wrote:
         | But apparently it's okay when Apple convinces millions of
         | unprepared people that their iphone will save them if they get
         | lost or in trouble in the wilderness?
         | 
         | The Apple "safety" features have cost more lives than they've
         | saved due to first responders wasting time on fake iAlerts that
         | keep them away from real emergencies.
        
           | asmor wrote:
           | The car crash detection, maybe. The fall detection seemed to
           | have been a success though.
        
           | mvkel wrote:
           | A woman used the SOS feature recently to get rescued, so ..
           | yes?
        
           | loloquwowndueo wrote:
           | Who said it's okay? All the media coverage I have seen point
           | to this iPhone feature being a pain in the ass for first
           | responders (skiers generating an inordinate amount of fake
           | calls).
           | 
           | Also, please point to hard data and all the lives this has
           | actually cost.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | The ski falling story has been making the rounds. And I can
             | certainly see skiing as a fertile source for false fall
             | detection alerts. I would (try to remember to) disable it
             | if I were downhill skiing if I otherwise had it active--
             | which I don't. (And really haven't decided if I should or
             | shouldn't.) But I also haven't actually seen data that this
             | is a genuine problem much less one that is overwhelming
             | emergency services and causing widespread carnage.
             | 
             | As for the satellite SOS, actual search and rescue people
             | I've talked to have been of the opinion that they'd rather
             | someone who is in trouble or thinks they're in trouble
             | reach out for help sooner rather than later. It doesn't
             | mean a full-scale rescue needs to be mounted. Someone can
             | often be talked through what their problem is. It's also
             | not like people didn't already have this capability so long
             | as they were in cell phone coverage.
        
         | 10x_contrarian wrote:
         | > had the Garmin technology been less intuitive for an
         | unfamiliar boater in a stressful situation -- this story
         | could've ended so much differently
         | 
         | This line made me look at the URL and realize I was reading an
         | advertisement.
        
           | iso1631 wrote:
           | > The boat had a Garmin GPS marine system, and while Andrew
           | said he hadn't been familiar with Garmin units prior to that,
           | it was easy to use, allowing him to figure it out quickly.
           | 
           | Got me
        
             | jacurtis wrote:
             | The article ended with:
             | 
             | > Andrew Sherman has since upgraded his tech on his own
             | boat.
             | 
             | > "I bought a Garmin unit because I was so impressed with
             | Sascha's," he said.
             | 
             | Definitely written to remind us all that Garmin GPS are
             | easy to use. Oh yeah, someone's life was saved, but don't
             | lose track on the shiny touchscreen GPS haha.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | I saw the URL before reading the article, and was basically
           | expecting the product placement as a punchline.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | tobyjsullivan wrote:
         | It's not smooth but not terrible considering this is corporate
         | blog content, not journalism.
         | 
         | At least they link to the original article which, after a quick
         | scan, seems much better written.
         | 
         | https://www.readersdigest.co.uk/inspire/life/how-a-fisherman...
        
           | victor9000 wrote:
           | Much better link, thanks!
        
           | KennyBlanken wrote:
           | Reader's Digest is not "journalism." They take a fairly
           | simple and straightforward event and embellish the hell out
           | of it to make into some grand tale, keeping it at about a 5th
           | grade reading level.
           | 
           | Compare and contrast the story to the local TV station
           | writeup:
           | 
           | https://www.wistv.com/2021/07/07/father-son-rescue-
           | missing-b...
           | 
           | Two fishermen see a boat with nobody piloting it, alert the
           | coast guard, follow the breadcrumb trail on the GPS unit, and
           | find the boat's owner. Owner is OK.
           | 
           | This story is why you wear the safety disconnect cord, or
           | purchase a cable-less shutoff system that uses an radio-
           | beacon fob you wear. Or, you don't go deep-water solo...
        
             | tobyjsullivan wrote:
             | Perhaps journalism wasn't the word I should have used
             | there. What would you call writing about factual events in
             | a way that makes them interesting to read?
             | 
             | That said, I don't think captivating writing is outside the
             | bounds of true journalism. Some might argue that's what
             | journalism is supposed to be. I.e., "here's an interesting
             | event and here's why it's interesting."
        
         | snemvalts wrote:
         | Learned from the best
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOHj5kGU4fY
        
         | kylehotchkiss wrote:
         | Garmin has a rep for difficult to use devices so if they worked
         | hard enough on this one that it could be used to save a guys
         | life (which it was! The track was mission critical for this
         | save), they get to brag a little about their role. This kind of
         | story might even ingrain better UI as a priority inside their
         | org which would be good for all their future customers
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | The story is on garmin.com ... call me crazy but I don't find
         | this the least bit "gross".
        
           | yafbum wrote:
           | It would be much better to own up the pitch upfront. Like,
           | start with a line at the top saying something like "We at
           | Garmin believe it's essential for our products to be easy to
           | use, and can be lifesaving. Here's a story that shows what we
           | mean... " Instead the content _reads_ like a story about
           | someone about to lose their life at sea. It's not a big lift
           | but would likely make a big change to the perception I (and
           | apparently others) have of this piece.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | I'm with you. All this cringe culture stuff is really too
           | much. It's been really annoying lately. Some sort of weird
           | Puritan outbreak.
        
         | asmor wrote:
         | My next thought was "are Garmin and Gatorade associated?".
        
       | chrisdalke wrote:
       | Amazing story and the pilot of that boat is lucky to be alive. I
       | think larger center consoles should ship standard with a wireless
       | safety lanyard instead of a wired one, because very few people
       | seem to actually use the wired lanyard because it's inconvenient.
       | this is the exact situation where that would help.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | This is one of those things that I always wondered about.
         | 
         | The risks are really apparent though for anyone out on a boat
         | and it just doesn't seem to be the standard operating procedure
         | for most folks.
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | This is not something I ever considered until I played
           | Stormworks, and my boat kept running away from me every half
           | hour.
        
         | blamazon wrote:
         | Wireless lanyard, today I learned! Looks like a complete setup
         | from 'FELL Marine' can be had for less than 300 bucks. That is
         | very little money for peace of mind.
        
           | StianOvrevage wrote:
           | I installed the Fell Marine Mob+ myself on my 23 foot day
           | cruiser a year ago and it works very well.
           | 
           | The only problem I've had is false positive cut-offs when I'm
           | on the dock untying or when I prepare to dock and I use the
           | arm with the wireless FOB on in the rear compartments of the
           | boat.
           | 
           | I could probably fix it by angling the antennae so that it
           | was upright instead of pointing out horizontally behind the
           | base unit, but TBH it's such a infrequent issue and only
           | happens at no/low speed anyway that I haven't bothered.
           | 
           | On the plus side at least I know that it does cut the engine
           | and probably would in a real situation as well.
        
             | pifm_guy wrote:
             | False negatives are more worrying. On a small speedboat, a
             | common cause of death is that the captain falls overboard
             | while the boat is doing a sharp turn at speed. The boat
             | then does a 360 circle and within 10 seconds runs over the
             | captain before anyone else in the boat can intervene.
             | 
             | Will these wireless keyfobs reliably cut out within 10
             | seconds when the boat never goes more than say 60 feet from
             | the captain? I suspect not.
        
               | burnished wrote:
               | Would a wired one that went unused prevent that? That
               | would seem to be the core problem in your scenario - the
               | existing technology that would not have a false negative
               | here is going unused.
               | 
               | Also, can you cite any sources for that event being
               | common (relatively at least)? Not that I doubt you
               | specifically, the scenario is just so horrifying that I
               | am generally having trouble accepting it.
        
             | brk wrote:
             | Go out with a buddy sometime on a day with a light wind.
             | Put your boat at a slow cruise and then jump off
             | (carefully). See if you can actually get back to your boat
             | before you're exhausted (and need your buddy to pull around
             | and pick you up).
             | 
             | In a light wind or current an average boat is still going
             | to be moving faster than most people can swim.
             | 
             | The wireless kill switch is good. But pair it with an
             | inflatable PFD.
        
               | blamazon wrote:
               | It's a tough engineering challenge but it be cool if
               | there was some kind of collapsible 'foot flippers' (is
               | there a more technical term?) one could pull out of like
               | a tube attached to a PFD.
               | 
               | I was watching the video of that boat that rolled at the
               | Columbia river outlet in Oregon and the USCG rescue
               | swimmer was astoundingly fast with the fins on.
        
               | StianOvrevage wrote:
               | That's a very good suggestion actually. It's probably a
               | very helpful, and I expect humbling, exercise.
               | 
               | (Have to remember to teach the buddy how to override the
               | MOB-system so that he can actually start the engine after
               | I go in the water though, lest it become a real
               | situation)
        
               | chrisdalke wrote:
               | I use a fanny-pack style autoinflating PFD which actually
               | comes with a ring to connect the lanyard to. Definitely
               | agreed you need both.
        
           | lazyant wrote:
           | 60% 1 star ratings on Amazon (failing device), still no peace
           | of mind but better than nothing :-(
        
             | RockRobotRock wrote:
             | https://xkcd.com/937/
        
             | bsder wrote:
             | Anyone who buys a _safety system_ from Amazon is completely
             | out of their gourd.
        
             | blamazon wrote:
             | I was not able to reproduce this result. Can you link?
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I assume this. https://www.amazon.com/product-
               | reviews/B075MMHYMK/
               | 
               | Overall the rating is pretty good but definitely a number
               | of one stars.
               | 
               | The challenge with a lot of safety and backup systems is
               | that you might never need them, but if you do need them
               | they absolutely _have to_ work.
        
               | Aeolun wrote:
               | All the failure modes seem to have to do with the engines
               | not starting when someone needs them, which sounds ok to
               | me.
               | 
               | Or maybe that's survivorship bias, and the ones where the
               | engines do not properly cut out are never in a position
               | to review.
        
               | blamazon wrote:
               | For what it's worth I flipped through the 1 star, 2 star,
               | and 3 star reviews and found one that indicated a false
               | negative, the rest seemed to indicate false positive.
               | With it being a predominantly self-installed electrical
               | system I question if every reviewer's install was done
               | correctly.
        
               | lazyant wrote:
               | https://www.amazon.ca/product-
               | reviews/B075MMHYMK/ref=acr_dp_... top result in Canada
        
               | blamazon wrote:
               | That listing has two total ratings, one is 5 star and one
               | is 1 star, with no textual reviews. Doesn't feel like
               | useful data to me.
        
         | andrewem wrote:
         | The guy who fell in the water talks about that here:
         | "Specifically, he wants people to know there are wireless
         | killswitches available that can attach to passengers as well as
         | the captain."
         | 
         | https://www.wwaytv3.com/i-was-going-to-die-man-goes-overboar...
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | Moreover, the lanyard should include a panic button that sends
         | out a SOS from the boat's radio.
        
         | wil421 wrote:
         | There's some fishing guys on YouTube I watch and some of them
         | have an app on their phone to shut the motor off. If they fall
         | overboard the motor shuts off when the phone isn't close
         | enough. Some also wear automatically inflated life jackets but
         | as a kayaker I don't trust them.
        
           | malandrew wrote:
           | IMHO aUrooj inflated life jackets generally make no sense for
           | kayaking. It's too easy to end up in the drink casually and
           | it's like $60+ per re-arming kit.
           | 
           | Are those fishing kayaks so stable that they have very little
           | expectation of going overboard comparable to being on a
           | powerboat or sail boat? I use touring and whitewater kayaks
           | myself.
           | 
           | I kayak and sail so I have life jackets for both use cases
           | (two type V rescue jackets for kayaking and 4 type V
           | inflatables for sailing to accommodate friends and better the
           | much safer European spinlock deckvests, which are not USCG
           | approved, so I keep USCG approved inflatables on board too)
        
           | sitkack wrote:
           | > an app on their phone to shut the motor off.
           | 
           | The failure risk here is the phone doesn't go with you and it
           | keeps chugging along.
        
             | Mixtape wrote:
             | This is doubled by the fact that lots of boaters will try
             | to keep their phone as far from the water as possible for
             | safety's sake. In practice, using your phone is better than
             | using nothing at all, but a dedicated waterproof device
             | that you can clip onto your clothes and forget about is by
             | far the better option.
        
           | markdown wrote:
           | > Some also wear automatically inflated life jackets but as a
           | kayaker I don't trust them.
           | 
           | Do you trust them as an adult? Or in some other context? What
           | about kayaking makes you distrust them? Should I, a non-
           | kayaker, trust them?
        
             | wlll wrote:
             | I'm a sailor (yachts, not dinghys), not a kayaker.
             | 
             | > Do you trust them as an adult?
             | 
             | Yes. The alternative (ignoring the solid foam type of life
             | jacket that you see kids wear) is a manually inflating one.
             | They use the same CO2 cylinder with a bladder, but you have
             | to pull a cord to inflate them. You can buy the exact same
             | model of life jacket as auto or manual inflating. The auto
             | inflating ones also have a cord you can pull if you need
             | to.
             | 
             | There is some debate in the sailing community as to whether
             | the auto or manual jackets are a better idea. With the
             | manual ones you can manoeuvre better in the water if you
             | don't inflate the jacket so you have a chance to swim to
             | safety, perhaps climbing back on your boat, but if you get
             | knocked unconscious or you're in shock (or the boats still
             | sailing) then that's going to be harder/impossible to do.
             | 
             | Personally me and my immediate family have auto inflating
             | ones, this model specifically:
             | https://crewsaver.com/uk/products/16708/ErgoFit190N. We
             | have some more basic models for guests. I figure I'm
             | unlikely to be sailing single handed and the best chance of
             | survival offshore is getting picked up by the crew of the
             | boat you were just in. Plus, I'm in NW UK, cold water shock
             | is a real thing. Staying afloat in the middle of the sea is
             | going to be the main thing you're going to want to be
             | concentrating on.
             | 
             | > Or in some other context? What about kayaking makes you
             | distrust them?
             | 
             | I wouldn't wear an auto-inflating jacket anywhere that I'm
             | likely to get dunked in the water as a matter of course.
             | You'll just inflate the jacket when you don't want to, it
             | will be completely in the way and you will have to deflate
             | it and it's then mostly useless until it's repacked with a
             | new gas cylinder. Plus, you're unlikely to be in the big
             | seas that would make an auto-inflater safer.
             | 
             | That said, it can get wet enough on a sailing yacht that
             | jackets can get wet enough to be inflated, but that's very
             | uncommon. Pretty funny though :)
             | 
             | > Should I, a non-kayaker, trust them?
             | 
             | It depends what you're doing. Sailing, going out on a
             | pleasure boat, day trips, weeks at sea, then sure. Stick
             | one on each of your family and guests, show them the pull
             | cord and tell them not to pull it unless they need to, and
             | you can pretty much rest assured that if they fall in
             | they're going to float until you can get to them. You can
             | also get beacons you can add to them, I've added them to
             | mine.
        
           | brewdad wrote:
           | Shouldn't a kayaker already be wearing a PFD? In my state
           | they are mandatory. They make PFDs that work specifically
           | with kayaks and their lowered seating.
        
             | jdminhbg wrote:
             | In many states it's mandatory to have one at all times but
             | not mandatory to be actually worn at all times.
        
           | andrewflnr wrote:
           | Specifically for kayak-related reasons?
        
             | Kon-Peki wrote:
             | Most likely. They are not supposed to trigger when getting
             | wet, even very wet, but _are_ supposed to trigger when you
             | go into the water.
             | 
             | You really shouldn't wear an auto-inflating PFD in a
             | situation where going into the water isn't 100% a bad
             | thing. Kayaking seems to be one of those activities where
             | you wouldn't want it. Even dinghy sailing/racing seems like
             | a poor use case.
             | 
             | In case anyone is unfamiliar with them, though, they all
             | have a manual pull handle that is supposed to trigger the
             | CO2 canister, and as a 3rd backup they even have a tube you
             | can pull up to your face and a one-way valve so you can
             | blow them up with your mouth.
        
       | thrill wrote:
       | 'Jack, a math major at the Naval Academy, has run the numbers
       | again and again, and it just doesn't make sense. "At some points
       | I think we were within even half a mile of him," Andrew said,
       | "but it wasn't until the end that we came onto him.'
       | 
       | Come on man ... you quit looking once you found him - that's why
       | it's called 'the end' - no special math required.
        
         | umvi wrote:
         | "The end" could also be the point where they call it quits
         | regardless of if they found him.
        
         | myself248 wrote:
         | Isn't it weird how things are always in the last place you
         | look?
        
           | squishy47 wrote:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3NTtagBmKY
        
             | leeoniya wrote:
             | the actual saying is "last place you _think_ to look " or
             | "last place you expect" (because it's so obvious /
             | uninteresting). but that doesnt make a joke.
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | You can fix this by continuing to look after you've found
           | something. "Phew, glad my keys were in the first place I
           | looked, and not the next ten"
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Just in case you find any extra keys to unlock those bonus
             | rooms, it's just good completionist practice.
        
               | wlll wrote:
               | The Fallout 3 "I'm going to find every last tin can in
               | this creepy abandoned building" method.
        
             | Waterluvian wrote:
             | It's important not to end the experiment prematurely in
             | order to obtain a proper set of data. Otherwise we end up
             | with conclusions like, "it's always in the last place you
             | look."
        
               | lisper wrote:
               | You never know, there could be more keys. Confirmation
               | bias is a powerful thing.
        
             | scintill76 wrote:
             | I always do my searches in constant time, to foil timing
             | attacks.
        
             | jahewson wrote:
             | I like to start with a failing unit test by deliberately
             | looking for the keys somewhere I know they're not.
        
             | wlll wrote:
             | It's important you do this to defeat timing based attacks
             | that might try to determine where you usually put your keys
             | based on the time taken to cut short the search.
        
           | dan-robertson wrote:
           | I find they're often in the first place you look but that you
           | miss the on the first cursory look.
        
             | scruple wrote:
             | A lot like getting the USB plug right the first time but
             | not realizing it. Happens every time.
        
             | oxfeed65261 wrote:
             | It's almost always in the Eureka Zone.
             | 
             | https://nevalalee.wordpress.com/2014/04/19/the-eureka-zone/
        
       | Hendrikto wrote:
       | > had the Garmin technology been less intuitive for an unfamiliar
       | boater in a stressful situation -- this story could've ended so
       | much differently.
       | 
       | Absolutely shameless...
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | Isn't this what we want marketing to be? Informative, empirical
         | and helpful?
        
       | marstall wrote:
       | tight writing, Garmin.com!
        
       | pauldprice wrote:
       | If I were an SEO manager, Garmin would be the dream job. They get
       | so much excellent content with real, meaningful stories to tell.
       | This article is pure SEO gold.
        
         | kylehotchkiss wrote:
         | The inreach rescues always sound like they'd make for good
         | movie plots!
        
       | NegativeLatency wrote:
       | Nice story but after the whole hacking thing and my own
       | experiences with their acquisition of delorme I'd steer clear of
       | Garmin if possible.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23926289
       | 
       | https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/4/21353842/garmin-ransomware...
        
         | EB-Barrington wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | akiselev wrote:
         | Do you plan on avoiding airlines your entire life? Cause Garmin
         | makes some of the most important avionics.
        
           | NegativeLatency wrote:
           | That's not exactly consumer level gear though is it, my in
           | reach is not subject to FAA regulations
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | pibechorro wrote:
       | Great story, but honestly Garmin is not any better than most
       | other major brands. They buy out their competition, that's their
       | "greatness". Navionics is a better chart plotter (which they
       | bought up) and some of the best features (active captain) where
       | community sourced info they also bought up.
        
       | puterich123 wrote:
       | The takeaway here is not "Divine intervention" but: A lot of
       | people fall off boats and die while taking a leak.
        
       | benatkin wrote:
       | Is the author from the UK? "Pile of weed" sounds like marijuana.
       | I would say "pile of weeds". Like "some weed" vs "some weeds".
       | Plus https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-
       | for/relieve_o...
        
       | ajjenkins wrote:
       | When describing how the boat owner fell off his boat, the author
       | said it could've happened to anyone, but it sounds like he was
       | peeing off the side of his boat while the engine was running.
       | 
       | I don't know, but that sounds pretty dumb to me.
        
         | blackoil wrote:
         | Anyone who travelled on old Indian railway can tell you one
         | hand to hold the rod and other to hold a rod.
        
         | evan_ wrote:
         | ...And everyone does dumb things once in a while.
        
         | spicybright wrote:
         | Being alone, not being at the controls while you're driving,
         | dangling near the edge, not wearing a life jacket.
         | 
         | Just not doing one of those things would have prevented or
         | drastically improved things.
         | 
         | He was even a lifeguard and served in the coast guard. It's
         | easy to get complacent!
        
         | akiselev wrote:
         | It's one of the leading causes of death in boating.
         | 
         | The leading causes of death in general aviation are the weather
         | and running out of fuel.
         | 
         | Humans are pretty dumb.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | It's a not unheard of cause of death in the Grand Canyon as
           | well. Someone gets up to take a pee at night (you're supposed
           | to pee in the river), maybe they're a bit drunk, and they
           | fall in and get swept downriver.
        
             | hackernewds wrote:
             | They fall from the grand canyon into the river? that's a
             | gigantic fall
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | On river trips when camping at night.
               | 
               | Though people have also died pretending to fall from the
               | rim and then they actually do. (You don't normally fall
               | all the way--the walls aren't that shear--but you fall
               | far enough.)
        
       | bradfitz wrote:
       | > The story was simple, really, and one that could happen to
       | almost any boater on any given day. Sascha had gone to the side
       | to relieve himself and simply fell overboard.
       | 
       | Almost any boater!
        
       | puterich123 wrote:
       | The takeaway here is not "Divine intervention" it's either: A lot
       | of people fall off boats and die while taking a leak, or there
       | are so many people on the ocean, that if you go in a straight
       | line, you're probably going to meet someone.
        
         | tobyjsullivan wrote:
         | That's not the takeaway _if_ either of those things are true.
         | I'm not sure there's much evidence supporting either of those
         | statements. The ocean is huge.
         | 
         | I'm not a religious person so I'd say this is a happy
         | coincidence. And coincidences involving rescues make great
         | stories.
        
       | curiousgal wrote:
       | Is it just me or is the title extremely confusing? Why do writers
       | do this?
        
         | 10x_contrarian wrote:
         | It's written by the Garmin PR team - their headlines are as
         | intuitive as their device UIs!
         | 
         | This article is much better:
         | https://www.readersdigest.co.uk/inspire/life/how-a-fisherman...
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | I understood it first time. What was confusing to you?
         | 
         | Ghost Boat - Either the craft didn't exist or it has no pilot
         | 
         | With Garmin GPS - okay, it's the no pilot case
         | 
         | Leads - Okay, they followed it to a waypoint or they discovered
         | it motoring aimlessly
         | 
         | Father-Son Duo - these two were the rescuers, cool
         | 
         | To Man overboard - okay, pilot fell off the boat
         | 
         | Definitely clear to me on first read and enough for me to click
         | through.
        
           | lazyant wrote:
           | as a non-native English speaker, it initially read as
           | (something boat) causes (father/son) to (go overboard)
        
             | 10x_contrarian wrote:
             | I'm a native english speaker but don't really have a marine
             | background. I also read it as the father/son somehow going
             | overboard.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | Fair enough. I can see how you could have reached that
             | conclusion. I suppose it's written for a native speaker.
             | 
             | For what it's worth, ChatGPT "comprehends" it correctly so
             | perhaps one day we can have a headline auto-expander.
        
             | sakopov wrote:
             | I'm not a native speaker either and I think what threw me
             | off was the "Man Overboard" bit, which is usually used as a
             | "maritime call" so to speak. So in other words, it wasn't
             | clear to me who was overboard, the father-son duo or
             | somebody else. What I think the title should have been is
             | "Ghost Boat with Garmin GPS Leads Father-Son Duo to a Man
             | Overboard", notice "a man overboard" to clearly indicate
             | that they were led to someone who was overboard.
        
               | robocat wrote:
               | It's not your fault: the title is very confusing to me
               | and my mother tongue is English. Perhaps finding it
               | confusing is a sign that your English is very good.
        
         | myself248 wrote:
         | Made perfect sense to me, but I think if I didn't already know
         | "Man-overboard" as a single term made up of two words, I
         | might've assumed "overboard" modified something else like
         | "leads" or "duo", and then it would've been quite confusing.
        
         | blamazon wrote:
         | For me it's kinda like those visual illusions that look like a
         | dog or a duck but never both. When I first saw this title I was
         | like "the heck is that word salad?" but now after reading the
         | article I can toggle it from making sense to not making sense.
         | Duck to dog and back again.
         | 
         | Postulating as to why writers do this generally - Imagine you
         | work in Garmin PR and you've been looking at this story,
         | thinking about this story, sending and receiving emails about
         | this story, having meetings about this story, etc, for way too
         | long. It suffuses into the tissue of your brain. The title now
         | makes perfect sense to you and you're so entrenched that you
         | can't see it that other way.
         | 
         | Finally, it's Friday. 4pm. Before a long weekend. You're going
         | on an amazing trip to the mountains and you're excited to not
         | think about marine GPS systems for ~72 hours. You've got the
         | post scheduled. Anton, your coworker, pings you and says "hey,
         | should we set up some time to talk about potentially reworking
         | this title? I showed the piece to a friend and they didn't
         | 'get' the title." You sigh, but dutifully pull up Anton's
         | calendar and start scrolling, only to realize he's taking all
         | of next week off and the week after you're going to a
         | conference to extoll the virtues of marine GPS systems and the
         | week after that he's going to a conference to extoll the
         | virtues of marine GPS systems and you're just tired of all
         | this, so you click the 'thumbs up' emoji, close your laptop,
         | and the whole thing just vanishes from everyone's mind. It's
         | the weekend, baby!
        
       | dlgeek wrote:
       | I mean, I get that it's a Garmin press release, but did anyone
       | else find the inserts about the GPS to be tacky?
        
         | lancefisher wrote:
         | I usually would, but I actually didn't find it tacky in this
         | article up until the end where the article mentioned they were
         | so impressed that they upgraded their own boat. That was just a
         | little bit tacky, but not terrible given it was a press
         | release. The rest is how I would talk about it while sailing. I
         | often say "the Garmin" instead of "the chart plotter".
        
         | anonymousiam wrote:
         | If the story is true, why not use it for advertising?
         | 
         | Here's a link to a similar page for a completely different
         | product: https://www.valentine1.com/v1-moments/
        
         | eschneider wrote:
         | Nah. Good PR is where you find it.
        
         | myself248 wrote:
         | Not at all. It's necessary detail for the story to make sense,
         | and of course Garmin is quite proud that their device played a
         | role in saving a life.
         | 
         | I know what they mean about ease of use, too. In the early
         | 2000's I had a Garmin eTrex GPS receiver, the little
         | translucent green one. Did a lot of hiking and geocaching with
         | it, hooked it to my laptop for wardriving, etc. And everything
         | I ever asked it to do was so easy -- there was no touchscreen
         | and the click-stick only had five "buttons", but the UI was
         | just profoundly intuitive.
         | 
         | I said at the time that if Garmin ever made a cellphone (this
         | was pre-smartphone and every phone reinvented its own
         | craptastic UI), I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Of course they did
         | release some Garmin-branded phones later, well into the Android
         | era, and the UI is generic Android. So much for that, and
         | more's the pity.
         | 
         | But I believe their marine instruments retain some of that old-
         | fashioned intuition, so anyone could just walk up and figure
         | out the interface. And that plays a role in the story, so it's
         | absolutely relevant to mention.
        
           | nanidin wrote:
           | The nuvifone was based on embedded Linux and the UI was
           | implemented in a mix of Qt and possibly Tcl/Tk. I'm not sure
           | how much Android played into things, but there was definitely
           | inspiration from the iPhone. It was the first phone Garmin
           | put out.
        
           | TheRealPomax wrote:
           | Man, if you can figure out a Garmin just by walking up to one
           | and figuring out the interface, you have several more degrees
           | than most people. If you know one, you know most of the
           | others, but if you know none, and you don't have the manual,
           | those things are confusing af.
        
           | akiselev wrote:
           | There's UX spillover from their avionics division, which has
           | indirect funding via NTSB recommending/mandating improvements
           | after accidents
        
         | goldenchrome wrote:
         | If you made a tool and you found out that someone used your
         | tool to save someone's life, wouldn't you be proud of yourself
         | for your good work? What's the harm in sharing the good news?
        
         | sudhirj wrote:
         | A little bit, but hey, they're not hiding anything. Everyone is
         | allowed to toot their own horn. I'd more pissed if this was
         | some paid PR piece hidden in a newspaper.
        
         | koolba wrote:
         | To be fair, if the waypoints weren't logged in the Garmin they
         | would never have found the overboard man.
        
           | snozolli wrote:
           | The waypoints could have been logged in _anything_. Any GPS,
           | or even a Google location history on a phone they found.
           | 
           | The heroes of the story are the two men.
           | 
           | It would be like if someone were about to sucker punch a
           | woman and you happened to be standing in the way. You're not
           | a hero, you just happened to be present.
           | 
           | It's also a type of scare mongering. "You might fall
           | overboard while peeing, and our product could save your life,
           | just look at this phenomenally unlikely scenario!" The much
           | smarter solution is to use a wireless lanyard or just pee
           | inside the boat, as commented elsewhere here.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | This was a nice story -- of smart and prepared people, dropping
       | what they were doing to do the right thing against the odds, with
       | some luck/divine help, to save someone -- and I think I'm going
       | to stop online stuff on a high note for this Sunday. :)
        
       | almog wrote:
       | On a tangent -- if you were to find a lost Garmin InReach device,
       | Garmin won't let you notify its owner:
       | https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=gpi2lWn8aE0dPyEfx6wQ78
       | 
       | Assuming the device has been lost for a while, it's likely that
       | its subscription is over, thus you cannot use it to contact any
       | of the previous owner contacts, which makes sense from privacy
       | perspective, yet I see no reason why Garmin will deliberately not
       | have any process of notifying the owner once your possession of
       | the device has been established
        
         | californical wrote:
         | I think that makes sense, many people don't want their contact
         | info given out to someone who happened to find their lost
         | device. If they wanted that, they could always just add a
         | keychain tag with their name and phone number to the device
        
           | almog wrote:
           | I agree and pointed to the fact that it makes sense they
           | wouldn't let you contact the owner directly and added that
           | one solution could have been to have Garmin notify the owner
           | that someone found their device.
           | 
           | When I lost my PLB (an emergency only type device) I
           | contacted NOAA to notify them of it so that in case it
           | accidentally gets activated, COSPAS SARSAT won't send an SAR
           | team to the midi pyrenees. Not only did they respond within
           | minutes but they told me that in case someone will find it
           | and contact them, they can share my details (to which I
           | happily agreed).
        
           | bagels wrote:
           | Simple solution is for Garmin to accept and reship the device
           | since they already know the owner?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-05 23:00 UTC)