The Titanic In 3-D 88
crimeandpunishment writes "A scientific expedition to the Titanic will create a detailed three-dimensional map of the world's most famous shipwreck. A 'dream team' of archaeologists, oceanographers, and other scientists will spend 20 days assessing the legendary ship's deteriorating condition, and collecting data and images. They're calling it the most advanced scientific mission to Titanic since its discovery 25 years ago. A leader of the expedition says this is the first time the wreck will be treated as an archaeological site, with two goals: 'One is to preserve the legacy of the ship by enhancing the story of the Titanic itself. The second part is to really understand what the state of the ship is.'"
Re:Close one (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, thank God. From the title I thought Hollywood was re-releasing Titanic in 3-D.
As did I. But frankly, is the actual project any more compelling? Its not like the Titanic is a remnant of a lost civilization.
Re:"The second part... (Score:5, Insightful)
One is to preserve the legacy of the ship by enhancing the story of the Titanic itself.
And by this part, I suppose they mean to "preserve the legacy of the ship by enhancing the story of a ridiculous show of hubris and excess built on the backs or hundreds of poor workers by a Victorian aristocracy that was as far removed from reality as is possible before a society starts to break down."
That's not saying that folks in the present day couldn't learn a thing or two from the story of the titanic, but I doubt the right folks will be paying attention.
Re:Phew (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Close one (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a good way to get funding. The Titanic was a delicious drama, with romantic deathy fapworthyness oozing from every porthole.
After the techies are done playing with their equipment and learning more about using it, a documentary or several can help pay for their fun.
I approve. :)
Re:"The second part... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think this is a fair characterisation of what was going on in the passenger ship business at the time. These ships were profitable, and a large part of the money came from 2nd and 3rd class accommodation (which was, incidentally, better on the Titanic than most other ships of the day). It was also a relatively safe ship, the hole that sank the Titanic would sink just about any ship.
These ships weren't 'ridiculous show[s] of hubris' any more than a fleet of 747s are. They were profitable and efficient ways of moving a lot of people around. Several companies were building ships the same size or bigger when the Titanic set off on it's maiden voyage, because it was seen as the most efficient way to run a passenger service.
The problem was that it wasn't carrying enough life boats. This was a regulatory problem (although you could argue that this shouldn't need regulation, it was just common sense!).
I don't think there are a lot of things to be learned from the Titanic: it was one fluke event. To learn the right lessons we need a bigger sample, more data. If we base our decisions on impressive single events, we're going to be make some silly decisions.