[HN Gopher] Canaries in coal mines (2018)
___________________________________________________________________
Canaries in coal mines (2018)
Author : baobabKoodaa
Score : 160 points
Date : 2023-01-06 13:35 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk)
| capableweb wrote:
| This seems to be blogspam, I first read this article over here
| (years ago I think), which seems to be the original one:
| https://blog.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/canary-resuscit...
| TSiege wrote:
| This article looks like an abridged publication of the one you
| linked to that was published about a week later in 2018. At the
| bottom of the article OP shared they even link to the original
| article and mention the original publication, "This article
| originally appeared on the MSIM Blog, explore more of their
| stories at blog.msimanchester.org.uk" So it seems more like a
| republishing, which is common for smaller media publications to
| do to expand reach
| capableweb wrote:
| The article OP shared does not link to the original article,
| but to the general page where the original can be found,
| specifically "https://blog.msimanchester.org.uk/".
|
| The original article also contains more images and more
| information. Seems fair to use the original when it is _the_
| original and also better than the copy.
| quietbritishjim wrote:
| Sounds like you just defined blogspam.
| eCa wrote:
| > the advent of electronic sensors in the mid-1980s
|
| We used actual canaries into the 80s? That's a few decades later
| than I would have guessed...
| dcminter wrote:
| > "He concluded the explosion was caused by a build-up of carbon
| monoxide"
|
| Surely that can't be correct? Typo for methane?
|
| Edit:
|
| Per BBC article, right gas, wrong association! The explosion was
| caused by methane, and Haldane identified carbon monoxide as a
| cause of some deaths.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-15965188
| sbierwagen wrote:
| Carbon monoxide is flammable, and OSHA lists explosive limits
| for it, so apparently some mixtures can explode:
| https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata/462
| dcminter wrote:
| Huh, TIL. Does seem to be the incorrect gas/context in the
| original article though (or at least the BBC article and the
| post are incompatible in that respect).
| aaron695 wrote:
| [dead]
| Lukasmacner wrote:
| That's some cyberpunk contraption!
| dokem wrote:
| I like how people in here think that someone who just spent 12
| hours digging coal out of hell has enough energy left over to
| give even half of a shit about some bird. You think they went on
| a strike until the company invented this thing? Saving the birds
| was not a thing LOL
| mdip wrote:
| That's really cool. I had assumed they always sacrificed the bird
| and I can't imagine everyone being OK with that over time.
| Regardless of the cost, most people don't relish the idea of
| killing an animal even if it means their own survival so it
| doesn't surprise me that an invention like this exists.
|
| As the article states, I can imagine the miners responsible for
| this duty became attached to the birds (especially _after_ they
| had a way to keep it alive).
|
| There's a detail that got lost in the shuffle there, though.
| While it had been possible to detect CO presence since -- I think
| -- the 20s or 30s, they didn't become common until the 80s. My
| Dad used to fly a private plane across the country selling CO
| detection solutions provided by his company to factories and
| businesses until the late 80s (from a little company in Ann
| Arbor, MI). Of course, come the mid-90s, most of us had devices
| that could detect presence and (to a lesser degree) levels in our
| homes.
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| I think this is something that everyone just adopts society's
| views on. I would wager most of the miners didn't care about
| the canaries at all. In early America people shot bison from
| trains for the hell of it. "The railroads began to advertise
| excursions for "hunting by rail," where trains encountered
| massive herds alongside or crossing the tracks. Hundreds of men
| aboard the trains climbed to the roofs and took aim, or fired
| from their windows, leaving countless 1,500-pound animals where
| they died." https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/where-the-
| buffalo-no-...
| jollyllama wrote:
| The duality of man.
| ClarityJones wrote:
| The symbolism is important too. If the company is dedicated to
| reviving the canary, then that helps miners believe that the
| company also cares about their lives and will work to rescue
| them in case of a disaster.
|
| If they don't care about the death of the canary in the coal
| mine...
| bee_rider wrote:
| Huh, so the physical canary in the coal mine is also a
| metaphorical "canary in the coal mine" with respect to the
| company's level of prudence. Is there a word for something
| which is analogy for itself?
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| A recursive analogy?
|
| Though a quick verbatim google search reveals no precedent
| in linguistics... so I may have just invented that one.
| bobkazamakis wrote:
| or they don't use the word recursive to describe two
| meanings, rather than recursion.
| diydsp wrote:
| > most people don't relish the idea of killing an animal even
| if it means their own survival
|
| 1,743 animals are killed for food per second(1) which aren't
| even required for their survival. And their deaths are
| celebrated(2)
|
| (1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33656480
|
| (2)
| https://www.google.com/search?q=i+love+animals+they+are+deli...
| TheFreim wrote:
| > 1,743 animals are killed for food per second(1) which
| aren't even required for their survival
|
| For food. Killing an animal for the purpose of feeding people
| is different than an animal who you take care of, that is
| meant to help protect you, being killed or dying.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| Killing at arm's length is very different from bearing
| witness to the death of an animal one has cared for.
| HellsMaddy wrote:
| It might feel different to a human, but it's the same for
| the animal either way. Similar to hiring a hitman, it's no
| more moral to kill at an arm's length. I believe it is less
| moral because there's an additional victim (the person
| performing the killing).
| shadowgovt wrote:
| Agreed, but the topic was feelings of humans.
|
| > most people don't relish the idea of killing an animal
| even if it means their own survival
|
| When people stop and think about factory farming, they
| hate what they think about. The trick most people employ
| is to not think about it.
| HellsMaddy wrote:
| > When people stop and think about factory farming, they
| hate what they think about. The trick most people employ
| is to not think about it.
|
| Exactly, this is known as "cognitive dissonance".
| ZhangSWEFAANG wrote:
| [flagged]
| DiggyJohnson wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| > Be kind. Don't be snarky.
| mdip wrote:
| I'm not sure what he made, but it was his first job so I'd
| imagine it was pretty terrible.
|
| Actually, I think he would have moved on from that job a lot
| earlier except that the owners paid for him to get his pilots
| license and then paid him to fly -- something I _know_ he
| _really loved_.
|
| He eventually created his own startup outfitting (mostly
| automotive) manufacturing plants with ... just about
| anything. His company (being that it was _actually his_ )
| also paid him to fly to various far flung (often rural)
| automotive plants -- it was often a business advantage that
| my Dad could drive 30m to the airport where his plane was
| stored and fly to a plant in any of the bordering states in
| as little as 30 minutes.
|
| I recall a story where one of the plants was 2-3 hours from
| any airport you could get a commercial flight into, and you
| always had to connect at Chicago O'Hare[0]. The only way to
| get there for day shift was to take the earliest flight out,
| but that flight _was always cancelled_ and everyone was
| tossed on the next flight that left 2 hours later. Some days
| took 10 hours flying commercial ... it 's like a 12 hour
| drive from here. When the plane was available[1], there was a
| small landing strip 10 minutes from the plant. I'm guessing
| it was 3-4 hours in the air (and a lot of time over Lake
| Michigan) in the Piper Cherokee but I have no idea ... it no
| more than 40 minutes of driving, though!
|
| [0] Which, apparently, was folly at every turn.
|
| [1] He shared it with a few other men but his company was the
| one using it the vast majority of the time.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Weird. That device had to cost many times more than a canary.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Even so, that doesn't necessarily make it any less economically
| sound.
|
| If it cost as much as 10 canaries, but replaced the need for 20
| canaries (over a lifespan of 10-15 years), it still checks out
| from a business sense. And the device itself lasts for decades
| so it's amortized across many years. Not to mention the
| additional cost and complexity of a "canary supply chain".
| Unlike bottles of oxygen, you can't just warehouse canaries for
| months without constant daily care.
|
| Now obviously there are emotional/ethical elements as well as
| mentioned by other commenters... but I just want to point out
| that these don't have to be _opposed_ to the economics of it,
| but can be _in addition_ to it.
| capableweb wrote:
| With the device you could use one canary many times, instead of
| just having use for one canary one time. One could argue about
| the morality/ethics of using one canary many times, but it
| seems simpler at least than to keep tens/hundreds of canaries
| available at every mine.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| In other words: there's an opportunity here for a startup
| offering subscription-based Canaries as a Service - someone
| will come every day to the customer to deliver new canaries
| and take spent ones. Canaries become the startup's
| responsibility, so the mine can focus on its core competency;
| something opex over capex, synergy etc. Invest now!
| Nextgrid wrote:
| The canary cage needs DRM and a network connection to make
| sure only "authorised" canaries can be used and aren't past
| their expiry date nor recalled.
| hnbad wrote:
| Combine this with a side gig of processing expired
| canaries.
| gpderetta wrote:
| No, no, as a side gig, _you_ can be the canary!
| alex_suzuki wrote:
| these canaries are strictly on-premise, or can we shift
| them to the Cloud too?
| ginko wrote:
| Coal miners probably liked their canaries quite a bit.
| anotheraccount9 wrote:
| Yes, and keeping and improving morale is priceless. If they
| perceived the canary as a companion, keep it alive was
| important.
| baobabKoodaa wrote:
| Yes. Maybe there's a sense of duty and reciprocity involved,
| since the canary is the one saving miners' lives.
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| Miners would not have afforded it either, 1800's coal miners
| in the Midlands and southwest of England would have included
| a fair share of children since they could deal with narrower
| spaces better.
|
| Siebe Gorman & Company Ltd was building deep diving gear in
| the 1800s. This would have been very niche and very
| expensive.
|
| Not to be overly cynical but this was likely used as a soiree
| entertainment contraption rather than intended for actual
| mine use.
| jakzurr wrote:
| > soiree entertainment contraption rather than intended for
| actual mine use
|
| Disturbing; and I seem to remember reading that people did
| use vacuum pumps for similar horrors. However, looking at
| the wear on the device in the first pic, I'm hoping that
| the story explained by the museum is true.
| tzs wrote:
| I'd expect that many mines have bottlenecks when exiting, like
| elevators, so a group of miners evacuating because their canary
| died might have to wait a while in some safe area to exit.
|
| They would want to be able to monitor for gas in that safe
| area. So they would need a second canary. And they would have
| had to keep that second canary separated from the first so that
| when they enter some place that will kill the first it doesn't
| take out the second there.
|
| That seems like it would be quite a hassle. Having one canary
| that can be reset after a gas detection would be a lot easier
| to deal with, and gives them a lot more flexibility if they
| can't promptly evacuate.
| modriano wrote:
| I bet that it enabled miners to get back to mining quicker, as
| they didn't have to bring in a replacement canary to check if
| the air was safe yet. So I bet that's the financial
| justification for the expense.
| laserdancepony wrote:
| Site doesn't even load for me. The blogs are getting more bloated
| by the minute.
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| I'm guessing that it does not like my ad/script blocking. I
| just get a blank page. Guess they didn't need me over there.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| It seems to come from a good place, but what a torturous life for
| the canary. Hopefully they let the birds retire at some point?
| lostlogin wrote:
| This seems optimistic. Have you heard of pit ponies? Many lived
| a life without seeing light.
|
| This isn't ancient history either - the last one in the UK died
| in 2011 and there were working pit ponies in the 1990s.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_pony
| teddyh wrote:
| Modern equivalents: https://web.archive.org/web/2014060710201
| 5/http://www.newsta...
| throwaway987234 wrote:
| [dead]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-06 23:01 UTC)