Thread by @SamiraNadkarni

I've just read the standfast and am already headdesking.

https://twitter.com/pearwaldorf/status/1435250033662726149

"Within three to six years, he imagined ships being repurposed as floating medical clinics." THIS IS ALREADY A THING. THEY HAVE BEEN A THING SINCE WWI.

The most ridiculous thing about this article is that it's arguing a lot of stuff like it's the most far-fetched thing you've ever heard, but a lot of it is fairly generic ideas in maritime. Large-scale floating platforms are already an investment hub.

There is a genuine set of questions about regulation because, outside of something like SOLAS, the larger issue would be what systems of governance would be followed. I'm guessing your regular shipping regulations re: waste disposal, etc would also kick in by default.

But actually, you absolutely do get a lot of people looking at living onboard ships, particularly since climate change has made flooding more likely in low-lying areas. But also, housing crises mean people have been repurposing ships for housing since at least 2016? maybe earlier

So far that's been happening in territorial waters, but it's not beyond the pale for someone to try this in open water or use colonial language for it. The ridiculous thing would be to try and do this assuming no maritime regulations would kick in (LOL) & you set the rules (LMAO)

I'm just here staring into camera because this libertarian turnip somehow thinks he's conceived of some sort of radical new idea that most governments and the maritime industry haven't been chewing on since the 1990s at least. What an utter cabbage.

Wait, they're doing this with a cruise ship so presumably it would be flagged, and they plan to have it stay near the coastline of Panama, which presumably means they're still in territorial waters. I'm here just... do... they understand... maritime law????

I'm just holding my sides and howling now at the idea of these super rich dudes literally parking themselves in a ship outside of territorial waters, like slathering themselves in ketchup and yelling, "please, come get us" without any concept of piracy rates in those waters.

(As a general point, piracy rates have practically doubled during the pandemic, likely because of geopolitical instability and uncertainty, but it's been a focus of so many talks by the UN and the IMO, I'm just here like "bro, please, pick up a newspaper!")

"The high seas, while appearing borderless and free, are, in fact, some of the most tightly regulated places on Earth. The cruise ship industry in particular is bound by intricate rules."

I AM COLLAPSED IN TEARS OF HILARITY. OH MY DAYS. THIS IS BEYOND EVERYTHING.

“We were like, ‘This is just so hard.’”

I. CANNOT. BREATHE. I may die from laughing as hard as I am. If I die, know I went out as I always hoped; mocking the utter uselessness of libertarian dudebros.

Oh my god, the sheer scale of incompetence is so far beyond anything I could have imagined when I began this article. How are these people alive?

OH MY GOD, THEY'VE DRAGGED P&O CRUISES INTO THIS ARTICLE. I C.A.N.N.O.T. I AM BEYOND THE ABILITY TO CAN.

All of this is so utterly beyond basic common sense. For these SeaPods to be beyond formal territorial legal systems (and therefore not infringing on government right to resources), they would have to be further than 200 nautical miles from any shore. So probably deep sea.

And one of the big issues you have in deep sea is:
1. Most materials we construct with aren't suited for salt water which will tend to wear them down.
2. Deep sea constructions are SUPER TRICKY and very carefully regulated already cause people tend to die.
3. It's hard?

Like, countries are ALL OVER this idea, have been forever, but the technology isn't there yet and regulations are still being drafted so this whole thing is just so amazingly pie in the sky that I'm shocked they even got as far as they did.

"It didn’t seem to mind the idea of a load of crypto-investors floating off their coastline, not paying any tax."

Allow me to explain how this would work: they would pay tax or get jailed. The nicely constructed infrastructure would continue to be considered territory of Panama.

I love how this whole thing is like, some governments totally gave it their support.

UM, YEAH? Have you not looked at every alternate government's nonsense plans for "sustainable tourism" in the last 10 years and how they plan coastal infrastructure along these lines?!

Again, you can only really con libertarian techbros with this sort of nonsense because their understanding of regulations is the same as my cat. Mau does not understand maritime regulations because she is a cat, and these dudes do not understand it because they are real useless.

"This would be an eco-friendly crypto-ship."

I'M COLLAPSED. How. How, friends. Literally the entire maritime industry would love to know. You could make billions overnight with a cruise ship run SOLELY on solar power. I am not even kidding, have you heard about decarbonisation?

It's literally the whole thing the entire industry is trying to sort out.

THEY BOUGHT A USED CRUISE SHIP AND ARE GOING TO... WHAT? RETROFIT IT? TO NOT USE CARBON-EMISSION FUELS?

BY MAGIC? IN 2020? I'M JUST COLLAPSED.

The entire maritime industry is having various meltdowns over how to decrease emissions and I'm reading 9 billion articles a day about blue hydrogen and methanol and wind power and what carbon offsetting might need to involve BUT NO, A CRUISE SHIP CAN RUN ON SOLAR POWER RIGHT NOW

(I need to send this to every maritime journalist I know. Oh my stars. Oh my sweet giddy aunt. It's gold.)

"High-speed wireless internet would come from land"

YOU CANNOT GET HIGH SPEED WIRELESS INTERNET FROM LAND IN THE DEEP SEA. YOU UTTER BEANBAG. THERE IS AN ENTIRE INDUSTRY WORKING TO PROVIDE SATELLITE INTERNET TO SHIPS AND IT'S A GENUINE ISSUE FOR SEAFARERS, I AM JUST.

"It would be a remote worker’s regulatory paradise." Except no, because you're on a vessel STILL in territorial waters (and so subject to regulation) and even if you went to deep sea, you're on a flagged ship (subject to regulations).

ALSO, and real important here, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO RUN A CRUISE SHIP SO YOU WOULD STILL NEED CREW. What sort of half-baked nonsense is this?! Crew changes are globally regulated. If you kept them at sea, you'd get REAL SUED by every human rights group working at sea.

"It turned out that the only cooking facilities would be in the restaurant."

I'm just here wheezing. Working in the galley is covered under the MLC. The ILO has a whole set of guidelines, and most countries have locally drafted formal regulations. MARPOL would kick in too.

I can name at least 4 regulations right off the bat that would be applicable to this vessel and I'm not even trying. This is a shambles. What lawyer let them say ANY of them? (Kidding, these are libertarian techbros. Why would they get anyone to check over their nonsense.)

WAIT. IT'S A 30 YEAR OLD CRUISE SHIP. THAT THEY SAID WOULD BE SOLAR POWERED??????????? omg, P&O, you really made your money here and good for you, this is just jokes, I have a full stitch in my side that hurts from laughing!

“It takes a rare kind of person indeed to move your life on to a deserted cruise ship in Central America with so little information up front.”

This is a lifetime original movie about a bunch of rich people dying at sea just waiting to happen.

(Ow ow my side actually hurts)

I'm finding it hilarious that this article is like, at 30 years this cruise ship was "a covid casualty" because 30 years is roughly your average life for a cruise ship in the industry. They can run longer, no doubt, but they'll usually be either sold on or sent for shipbreaking.

So when I said P&O made out great here, they really did. You need to remember that the cruise ship industry is VERY public-facing so it is some of the tightest regulations in the industry (cause, you know, lives at stake) + upgrades are what keeps money coming in.

Again, the fact that they picked A CRUISE SHIP to do this on is really just laying me out because you COULD NOT have easily picked a maritime sector that would be harder on libertarians. I'm facedown at the very idea.

Also, presumably if they're so tied to the Panama government, they've picked Panama to flag with? Flag states report accidents or casualties or port state inspections. All of this stuff says whether a state is white flagged (good), grey flagged (iffy), or black flagged (uh huh).

So while Panama may not have the strictest of flag state rules, they're probably going to want to enforce the ones they have, particularly if these weird little toasters are going to VERY publicly run amok flouting regulations & potentially endangering the vessel & lives at sea.

WAIT
Wait
wait
... they didn't even check if the vessel was still certified as seaworthy????

READ MARPOL ANNEX V. THIS SHIT IS ILLEGAL, BITCH.

Imagine being any sort of P&I Club and having this mess landed on your doorstep. Why wouldn't they insure? WHERE DO YOU WANT TO BEGIN. They wouldn't comment because telling the truth would get them tied up in presumed defamation cases for calling everyone involved a complete cake

I love that whoever this author is assumes the issue is the ridiculous Americans onboard the cruise ship disaster versus, you know, the fact that this would bankrupt any insurance firm willing to take this on almost immediately + destroy the reputation of anyone who signed this.

The saddest and yet funniest thing ever is that this article is like "maritime has so many unexpected regulations" except the maritime industry is actually working REALLY hard to catch up to transport regulatory regimes, and is actually notorious for terrible labour practices.

(It's the same basic system as anywhere else: regulations are nice documents, but difficult to enforce and usually enforced only against anyone without enough power to get out of it being enforced. "If you can pay, you can play" is pretty standard even at sea.)

So if anything, maritime doesn't have half the regulations it needs, and the ones that it does are incredibly hard to enforce. There are some great non-profits doing sterling work fighting for better but there's a lot of resistance too. (If you can, always join a union, friends!)

"He estimated that, given six months, they could have hired a crack marine legal team and navigated a way through the loopholes."

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHAAH

I am now just embracing the utter unthinking stubborn refusal of this peanut to even consider how long even basic upgrades, testing, and certification for seaworthiness would take. It's nonsense, but I'm viewing his ability to reason like that of a turtle on its back.

I'm beyond all things at this point. I've just given up. You can't make this shit up. I would have assumed this was made up five ridiculous statements ago BUT THIS IS ALMOST TOO FAR.

INSTALLING A SMALLER ENGINE
ON A CRUISE SHIP
WHILE ANCHORED
AT PORT
AND CURRENTLY UNCERTIFIED FOR SEAWORTHINESS

i rlly wndr y no1 wld insure ths

"They wanted to run a floating society of like-minded freedom-lovers arranged in the shape of the bitcoin B."

It's the whole shape of the "B" thing that just puts this over the top. I can't. I can't.

And of course it's been sold to a shipbreaking yard at Alang. Just so everyone knows, shipbreaking is very dangerous for workers & is rarely properly regulated in South Asia (though we pretend our supposed compliance with the HKC convention does anything but below bare minimum).

(I used to write about labour practices and shipbreaking at my previous job so yes, I know enough to side-eye this shit. If you want to learn more about the issues at hand, NGO Shipbreaking is a really good source: shipbreakingplatform.org)

"... according to the Basel Convention, which covers the disposal of hazardous waste, they weren’t allowed to send the ship from a signatory country (Panama) to a non-signatory country (India)."

I'm so intensely pleased, I cannot even pretend otherwise. GOOD. Fuck these dudes.

Omg, and we've gone from libertarian nonsense to cryptocurrency to shipbreaking to covid denial to Brexit. It's like a highlights reel of terrible things that exist in 2021.

"Exploring the engine rooms of an empty cruise ship seemed to give these men a particular sensation: perhaps just the buzz of owning something so vast & powerful; a mechanical, proprietary thrill."

Please, writer, calm down. None of these dudes are making any good decisions.

Well, you could put that entire article in the dictionary next to the word "malarkey" and feel perfectly at peace with the world. Wow. What utter nonsense.