←back to thread

499 points perihelions | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nabla9 ◴[] No.42191758[source]
October 2023 there was similar incident where Chinese cargo ship cut Balticonnector cable and EE-S1 cable. Chip named 'Newnew Polar Bear' under Chinese flag and Chinese company Hainan Xin Xin Yang Shipping Co, Ltd. (aka Torgmoll) with CEO named Yelena V. Maksimova, drags anchor in the seabed cutting cables. Chinese investigation claims storm was the reason, but there was no storm, just normal windy autumn weather. The ship just lowered one anchor and dragged it with engines running long time across the seabed until the anchor broke.

These things happen sometimes, ship anchors sometimes damage cables, but not this often and without serious problems in the ship. Russians are attempting plausible deniability.

replies(8): >>42191786 #>>42191808 #>>42191875 #>>42191880 #>>42192160 #>>42197213 #>>42197559 #>>42201843 #
yett ◴[] No.42191880[source]
Yeah and this time they won't let them get away. According to Finnish Minister of Defence: "The authorities in the Baltic Sea region have learned from the mistakes of the Baltic Connector investigation and are prepared, if necessary, to stop a ship in the Baltic Sea if it is suspected of being involved in damaging communications cables."[1]

And it looks like according to marinetraffic.com that the Yi Peng 3 is indeed at full stop surrounded by at least 3 Danish navy vessels.

1. article in Finnish https://www.hs.fi/politiikka/art-2000010845324.html

replies(2): >>42192708 #>>42192739 #
dingdingdang ◴[] No.42192708[source]
Boarded according to: https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1859132263746744367
replies(2): >>42192986 #>>42196268 #
bananapub ◴[] No.42192986[source]
worth noting that twitter account is not the most trustworthy or independent.
replies(1): >>42194558 #
hersko ◴[] No.42194558[source]
What have they posted that was wrong?
replies(2): >>42194871 #>>42197175 #
ceejayoz ◴[] No.42194871[source]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visegr%C3%A1d_24#Content details a number of cases.
replies(2): >>42197457 #>>42199071 #
mistermann ◴[] No.42197457[source]
It would be useful to have a site that logs all plausible issues of this kind, at arm's length from Wikipedia editors.

Kind of a "Who watches the watchers?" type of thing.

replies(2): >>42197585 #>>42200504 #
1. squigz ◴[] No.42197585[source]
Why would that not be prone to the same issue you think Wikipedia faces?
replies(2): >>42197719 #>>42197722 #
2. mistermann ◴[] No.42197719[source]
Superior methodology (transcending numerous cultural / psychological / cognitive norms and obligations) is how I would go about it.

For example: banning the conflation of opinion and fact, like what's going on (and always goes on) in this thread, a behavior that is protected (doing otherwise "is not what this site is for").

If an imperfection is noted: log it, investigate, improve. Rinse, repeat.

Also: best prepare one's will, life insurance, etc before undertaking such a project.

3. zelphirkalt ◴[] No.42197722[source]
Maybe it would not, but putting all your eggs in one basket has never been a good idea either.
replies(1): >>42197742 #
4. squigz ◴[] No.42197742[source]
I don't think that's what we're doing, considering Wikipedia points to other 'baskets' as sources.