What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
98 Comments
- brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -12/+39We digg you down because you add NOTHING to the discussion. Who cares if its a dupe? The people that have seen it already will be able to tell they've seen it from the title and just ignore it. The people who haven't seen it (like me) will have another oppurtunity to enjoy it.
Report it if you don't like it. Otherwise stfu. Actually, stfu either way.
Oh, and I can only imagine what will happen if "see who dugg this comment down" gets turned on. "OMG WHY DID YOU DIGG ME DOWN?!?! YOU'RE SUCH A LOSER I ***** YOUR MOM LAST NIGHT!" - 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -13/+32Well, report it if you don't like it. Don't spam here (like me now).
- Amplix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19From the article: " The SMALL BOAT on the deck of carrier contains a generator and electronics to set off the explosions. It was designed so this small boat would float free after the carrier sunk!"
I doubt someone was in that boat if there were explosives in the carrier. - zach_sp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20"The project was repeatedly delayed to meet Environmental Protection Agency concerns about removal of hazardous substances including oil, fuel, asbestos and PCBs -- polychlorinated biphenyls, which are cancer-causing substances used throughout old ships in electrical equipment."
They "clean out" the ship pre-sink, so to speak, so all they are doing is putting a huge chunk of metal underwater. - masterfoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1820 million to sink her? damn.
- ksgant, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Also, look at some of the ships sunk in the Pacific in WWII that didn't get everything removed like fuel and asbestos and lead paint...they themselves are thriving in reef systems now.
- pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12what kind of ride would it be in that lil boat on top. Weeeee
- patrock, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Amplix beat me to it. I doubt anyone was on the boat either, but I'm guessing due to enviromental regulation, there is almost no chance the small boat would have dropped the generator (containing oil and gas) into the water. So it was probably safe enough for a human as well.
"The SMALL BOAT on the deck of carrier contains a generator and electronics to set off the explosions. It was designed so this small boat would float free after the carrier sunk!" - DasAmigo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I actually didnt get this as a dupe FYI, my dad sent me the link in an email and I thoguht it was cool I did see al lthe other dupe articals when I submitted it but only 1 of those many links linked to what I was submitting and the link had 6 diggs, was ancient, and because some noob doent know how to write a title to catch peoples attention long enough to give somthing the digg it deserves. The photos on my link are nicer because their very highrez photos that were scaled down for the web instead of the crap that was in the other links.
Just cause somone posts a dupe doesnt mean it doesnt deserve a look, stop judging before you view somthing. Most users dont view diggs that arent on the front page. Brining a quality article to the the frontpage is worth a single dupe. Sry. Drive through plz. - elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The flight deck is at 200 feet, which is below recreational dive limits - luckily the tower (which is apparently more interesting) is within the limts.
- WillyVolk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10http://www.divester.com/2006/05/20/first-underwater-video-of-the-oriskany/ -- the footage was taken underwater, AFTER the sinking.
- thephillyman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I bet the dudes on Mythbusters would have loved to have these pics when busting the "vacuum effect" myth regarding how a sinking ship would pull down anyone swimming in the water around it. Of course, the myth involved only people swimming around, not boats sitting on the deck!
- jpwhitmore, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14It looks like someone may have rode it down on that little ship sitting on the deck.
- dillboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Free diggs to the provider of video footage.
- retral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Thanks, these pictures are a lot better than the last ones.
- DasAmigo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7that was amazingly high rez opposed to the ones that have been released on other sites and news reports but the title doesnt allow for that and a 1.5 wouldnt take photos likethis, these were obviously scaled down.
- yardape6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The flight deck is at about 137ft according to divers that have already gone down. You can check it out here.
http://www.divester.com/2006/05/23/how-deep-is-the-oriskany/ - WillyVolk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5http://www.divester.com/2006/05/17/footage-of-oriskany-sinking/
- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"High res" on Digg is the new "hack" or "AJAX"...totally arbitrary.
- Worktruck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yeah, I work for Florida's EPA and we had one of our guys down there filming it, and after the Navy checked it out to make sure all the explosives went off he got to go down and take some underwater shots. I helped him set up a little presentation for our department on Thursday it was some real interesting stuff. He said that the EPA liked it because it was a complex structure so they are expecting a lot of diverse sea life.
I went around telling everyone I knew in my dept. to go, because it looked like it would be interesting. Of course I turned around and completely forgot to go. I was told it was well worth checking out. I'm kicking myself for that. - grooviekenn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5umm.. 7 diggs in 7 days versus 12 hours.. common Digg Nazi... it's fine
- Amplix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This guy's title is more amazing
- Grimdotdotdot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'm still looking for 'amazingly high rez photos' - whoever wrote added this story (for the sixth time) must have a pretty crappy digital camera if these are 'amazing'...
- DasAmigo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I actually didnt get this as a dupe FYI, my dad sent me the link in an email and I thoguht it was cool I did see al lthe other dupe articals when I submitted it but only 1 of those many links linked to what I was submitting and the link had 6 diggs, was ancient, and because some noob doent know how to write a title to catch peoples attention long enough to give somthing the digg it deserves. The photos on my link are nicer because their very highrez photos that were scaled down for the web instead of the crap that was in the other links.
Just cause somone posts a dupe doesnt mean it doesnt deserve a look, stop judging before you view somthing. Most users dont view diggs that arent on the front page. Brining a quality article to the the frontpage is worth a single dupe. Sry. Drive through plz. theresa duped comment for you; ) - jbus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Yeah...They are clearly fake.
Don't believe anything you see with your own eyes either because the resolution is too high as well. - tomkin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8complaining bitches.
- Sterch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4(In Best Battleship Game Voice) Battleship SUNK!
- brdsofprey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What an unscientific response. How does a steel structure sitting on the bottom of the ocean constitute an environmental problem? Of course provided all the toxic stuff was really removed like they said. Which I really hope for all the money spent on it.
Thanks Hooverzilla. Aparently all the toxic junk wasn't removed. - skaughtm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3i don't understand all the problems with the multiple story submitions. the whole point of the site is for us to sumbit and then "digg" the ones we like right? and it appears that this submition was similar to other stories but not the exact same (different set of pictures). so we dugg this one an not another, we weeded out the ones we didn't like as much, right? is it just bitter users that are getting upset that people dugg someone's elses page and not theirs?
i find there are plenty of things that can effect whether or not someone diggs a story/link, whether it's the content the user puts in the description or if the grammar is proper and you can actually understand the title/description. i imagine the majority of people don't read anything beyond the front page anyways.
i figured people would have gotten over posting messages about a story being a dupe seeing as they get dugg-down every time. - EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It must have been so hard to land that little boat on the deck of an aircraft carrier!
On a serious note: I wonder why it wasn't used for say, torpedo testing or something. I'm not saying it should be, it just seems like there would be a big push for it. - Jarrod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Mythbusters was definitely right!
- Daisuke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2He beleives the photos were taken by the US Navy - does that mean they are in the public domain? I know alot of works from the federal government are in the public domain, but are these covered as well?
- prab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Can anybody find a video?
- akinnee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dude that looks awesome to see that old rusty thing go down.
- ipodman715, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, I love how the little boat got away unharmed.
- HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm bumped him up one for you...
- HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Reminds me of the original Batman movie...
Batman calls Pentagon: "Admiral, have you recently sold any submarines?"
Admiral: "Hmmm... let me see... Yes, we sold one to a Mr. Pen Gooin."
Batman: "Mr. Pen Gooin?"
Robin in background: "Penguin!"
Admiral: "Did we make a mistake Batman?"
Batman: "Selling a nuclear submarine to someone who left no adress or contact information..."
I've paraphrased, but you get the gist of it... - DasAmigo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"theresa duped comment for you; )" ....duh?
- lykedoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Oh really, they were taken by a dslr? Well then why the hell don't PEOPLE POST THE ORIGINAL F'IN SOURCE OF THE PICTURES! Furthermore, I still wouldnt call these 4288x2848 pixel pics "Amazingly High Rez":
http://www.navy.mil/search/photolist.asp?sort_type=0&terms=Oriskany&search_type=All&sort_row=1&page=1
digg is turning into a collection of ***** spam email photos. - WillyVolk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://www.divester.com/2006/05/17/footage-of-oriskany-sinking/
- Greymoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The small boat was put there for your amusement. We are glad that you are amused. Do not abuse the muse.
US NAVY - mrjeffery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I bet some crappy mid-east country would sell all their wives for a carrier like that.
- troydoogle7, on 10/12/2007, -9/+10Only cool people can post dupes... you just aren't cool.
I hadn't seen it yet, so thanks DasAmigo. There are a lot of people that haven't seen it otherwise it won't make the front page!!!
Ps only cool people get to the frontpage. Its in the Digg TOS! - elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2What's up Willy. Divester in the digghouse.
- nnonix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Digg really needs to kill all the "Curious George" ***** out there who don't read the article and still post comments. Dumb asses are asking questions answered by the article. What a waste of skin.
- elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The steel in WW2 era aircraft carriers is actually highly prized for its quality - so 'big hunk of junk' - hardly. And creating artificial reefs is not littering.
- Amplix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2*sigh*
"The SMALL BOAT on the deck of carrier contains a generator and electronics to set off the explosions. It was designed so this small boat would float free after the carrier sunk!"
Right at the top - dknighton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That's one of the greatest examples of recycling known to man. And the federal government did it. Talk about irony!
- gorndog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Makes me feel better about not recycling my soda cans.
- jjbird, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3fta:
"The SMALL BOAT on the deck of carrier contains a generator and electronics to set off the explosions. It was designed so this small boat would float free after the carrier sunk!"
i doubt anyone was on it -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is