"Fisher Hallur Antoniussen took a photo of it to show crewmates, but it quickly took off after being posted on social media."
I don't blame it, I would have done the same.
tickerticker · 1d ago
The exposed portion of the berg is roughly spherical. The submerged portion must be enormous and approximately symmetrical to hold that sphere in such an upright position.
Frummy · 1d ago
So the tip of the iceberg is just the tip of the iceberg
lucyjojo · 1d ago
Indeed, that tautology is a true statement.
Retric · 1d ago
With just one photo we can’t really say if the exposed portion is roughly spherical. However, the guy taking the photo who presumably got a better look seems to think it was “diamond shape.”
No comments yet
tantalor · 1d ago
Check around it for Super Samples!
jvanderbot · 1d ago
I wish I didn't think this immediately as well.
creaturemachine · 1d ago
Wait until the Democracy Officer hears of this lack of faith!
bee_rider · 1d ago
Do black Labrador icebergs also have webbed feet, to swim better?
bregma · 1d ago
No, but golden Labrador icebergs are the friendliest of all the icebergs and can make a great addition to any family.
burnt-resistor · 1d ago
The vet bills and cleaning up after them is really ridiculous.
scoot · 1d ago
Is this just of passing interest, or something that "ists" (scientists, geologists, climatologists etc.) would gain potentially valuable data by taking samples from it?
No comments yet
trod1234 · 11h ago
Why would an iceberg be a "he is all black?"
morkalork · 1d ago
Will the icebergs broken off get older and older?
cess11 · 1d ago
As long as we keep pushing CO2 into the atmosphere and don't run out of ice, yeah, most likely.
IncreasePosts · 1d ago
Wouldn't this melt "quickly" due to solar radiation based on how dark it is? That is to say, I wouldn't it most likely be closer to 100 years old than 100,000 years old?
burnt-resistor · 1d ago
That's for new soot depositing on ordinary, existing glaciers with previously high albedo. That causes a spiraling feedback effect of more forest fires and accelerating glacier melt,
It's probable that these dark glaciers are mostly sludge with only a bit of ice. We won't know until some field researchers go out there and gather data and samples.
malfist · 1d ago
I'm sure you know more about iceburg ages than the professor of oceanography that dated it.
dotancohen · 1d ago
To be fair, the guy who just dated it likey knows the least about it. It's the guy who broke up with it that knows the most.
IncreasePosts · 1d ago
I was literally asking about the range that the oceanographer provided. I didn't assert anything
marcusverus · 18h ago
This post--which actually engages with the content of the article--is being downvoted, while "Do black Labrador icebergs also have webbed feet, to swim better?" is being upvoted.
Where do we run once the redditification of HN is complete?
dylan604 · 1d ago
After reading, I'm less interested in a black iceberg as much as now wondering what a fish harvester is as it's not a term I've seen before. Have we changed the term to reflect the vast quantities of fish that fisherman is inadequate?
The history page of the local union, they use the phrase “fish harvesters” rather interchangeably with “fishermen”: https://ffaw.ca/about-us/history/
serial_dev · 1d ago
It could be to make fishermen gender neutral, but I think it is to hide the fact that you are essentially killing the fish by the thousands, letting them suffocate. Fish harvesting sounds innocent and PG 13.
ahazred8ta · 1d ago
There's a union or collective bargaining guild that has trademarked the term Professional Fish Harvester in Canada. #PFHCB
Yeah, Newfies speak English just like Scottish speak English. Those words might be English, but it's the phrasing that makes no sense.
Eavolution · 1d ago
Can confirm, I've only ever heard a chain of the word "woof" from a newfie.
mc3301 · 1d ago
What're you at 'der b'y?
grovesNL · 1d ago
Yes b'y, Newfoundland English is best kind sure.
fooster · 1d ago
Newfoundlanders you mean.
brailsafe · 1d ago
Fairly sure Newfie is broadly used as a colloquial term of endearment in the rest of Canada, by Newfoundlanders and non-Newfoundlanders. There's just too many syllables
creaturemachine · 1d ago
How about Newfoundland-and-Labradorean? It's funny that the only ones insulted by Newfie are the non-newfies.
fooster · 1d ago
I am a Newfoundlander and I don’t appreciate that term.
fooster · 1d ago
It is not. It is insulting and derogatory. Don’t use it thanks.
brailsafe · 23h ago
While that's not how it's ever been used in my life, I can accept that it's perfectly valid for you and presumably many others to feel differently.
Having grown up with so much predominantly east coast originating comedy, and around so many Newfoundland diaspora, I guess it never occurred to me that there was any real negative connotation whatsoever, beyond poking a bit of fun at some of the presumably antiquated cultural stereotypical differences via self-deprecating jokes that most people from smaller places have their own versions of and don't take too seriously.
tejtm · 1d ago
Curious that.
The English did force the French population out of there and down the Mississippi to become Cajuns.
And the children of the native Abenaki population were sent to English Schools.
Acadians were in Nova Scotia.
There were already a bunch of French in New Orleans/Louisiana. Hence "Louis"iana, new "Orleans", "De-troit" etc. It was all new France.
And the residential schools happened well after the formation of Canada, and a lot of happened at the behest of the Catholic Church (ie: French Canadians). see Vital Grandin.
margalabargala · 1d ago
Well sure. Lots of shitty things were done that caused the current state of affairs to come into being.
I was just describing the present day, not defending whatbwas done to create it.
HPsquared · 1d ago
It makes sense in the context of fish farming. Not sure if that's what this is, though. Harvesting doesn't sound appropriate for catching wild fish.
aerostable_slug · 1d ago
FWIW, it's a reasonably common euphemism in hunting. Example:
Might one say fish harvesters capture "exponentially more fish"? (Sorry, couldn't resist...)
dan-robertson · 1d ago
I think it might be a gender-neutral version of fisherman. Not something like a factory ship.
xeromal · 1d ago
It's a horrible alternative lol
blipvert · 1d ago
Wait until you have to deal with the horror of gender specific icebergs!
“It's not only that he is all black. He is almost ... in a diamond shape”
IncreasePosts · 1d ago
Fisherman: catches fish
Fish harvester: might catch fish, but might also be the one that cleans/processes them and isn't actually involved in pulling the fish out of the water
NooneAtAll3 · 1d ago
ohhh, I thought it was the boat
m3kw9 · 1d ago
When are these going on sale in drinks?
tromp · 1d ago
> He guesses the ice in the berg is at least 1,000 years old, but could also be exponentially more ancient — even formed as many as 100,000 years ago.
That's not exponentially more (which would be a preposterous 2^1000 or 10^1000 years old). It's just 100 times more. Should I stop being annoyed at how media use the word and just accept their alternative meaning of "a lot" ?
Scarblac · 1d ago
It's two numbers. It's a constant increase, you can fit a line between them, but also a degree 10 polynomial or an exponential curve.
Yes, it just means "a lot".
burnt-resistor · 1d ago
High variance/confidence interval. Probably needs some C14 / O18 dating to narrow it down by field researchers gathering samples rather than us speculating from afar.
escapecharacter · 1d ago
I agree, you can also say exponential if there's 4 or more numbers.
jhrmnn · 1d ago
This is how language develops, I’m afraid. But imagine that the age is 10^k where k is something like “age class”. Then indeed the age grows exponentially :)
serial_dev · 1d ago
It still doesn’t grow exponentially, it is just orders of magnitude older.
Possibly, because if I read between the lines, their answer is “huh I dunno”.
parineum · 1d ago
Orders of magnitude is an exponential measure.
1*10^n
serial_dev · 1d ago
Yes, but where is the growth? They just said that the age of iceberg is 1000 years or maybe older 100.000.
There is no exponential growth there, just someone not having any clue about the iceberg wanting to sound knowledgeable about the subject.
WithinReason · 1d ago
so then every change can be called exponential
serial_dev · 1d ago
> This chair is 4 years old. Or, maybe 5 years old.
Yeah, exponential growth!!!
SAI_Peregrinus · 1d ago
1.0116^10000 ≈ 100000
Journalists tend to just think of it as "a lot more", but since they didn't specify the base of the exponential we can at least find a way to make the article technically correct. There are fun classes that admit incomparable values, such as the Surreal games. If they'd said "the game {1 | -1} is exponentially more than { | }" then it'd be impossible to find a base to make the statement true. There's lots of fun to be had with this sort of math, as you know.
mekoka · 1d ago
If we want to express ourselves using exponents, consider that 1000 years (1×10^3) and 9000 years (9×10^3) would be of the same "degree" of ancestry, while 100,000 years (1×10^5) would be of completely different (exponential) significance.
Frummy · 1d ago
1000^(5/3)=100 000
ghssds · 1d ago
1.01158^1000 ~= 100000
Exponentially more!
readthenotes1 · 1d ago
10^2 in exponential form...
At least he didn't say logarithmically more
867-5309 · 1d ago
1000^1⅔=100000
fuzztester · 1d ago
it's not only the media.
it's just a figure of speech, (used like some people (ab)use "literally"), which I am sure you know, considering your profile, or even otherwise.
other people than the media use it too:
e.g. this Rob Pike post about Go (the programming language, not the game you like):
I don't blame it, I would have done the same.
No comments yet
No comments yet
It's probable that these dark glaciers are mostly sludge with only a bit of ice. We won't know until some field researchers go out there and gather data and samples.
Where do we run once the redditification of HN is complete?
The history page of the local union, they use the phrase “fish harvesters” rather interchangeably with “fishermen”: https://ffaw.ca/about-us/history/
https://www.alaskasafetyalliance.org/explore-careers/maritim...
That's quite generous of you to say.
https://www.heritage.nf.ca/articles/society/language.php
Having grown up with so much predominantly east coast originating comedy, and around so many Newfoundland diaspora, I guess it never occurred to me that there was any real negative connotation whatsoever, beyond poking a bit of fun at some of the presumably antiquated cultural stereotypical differences via self-deprecating jokes that most people from smaller places have their own versions of and don't take too seriously.
The English did force the French population out of there and down the Mississippi to become Cajuns.
And the children of the native Abenaki population were sent to English Schools.
And the residential schools happened well after the formation of Canada, and a lot of happened at the behest of the Catholic Church (ie: French Canadians). see Vital Grandin.
I was just describing the present day, not defending whatbwas done to create it.
"Deer and elk harvested from certain hunt zones must be tested." https://wildlife.ca.gov/hunting/deer
“It's not only that he is all black. He is almost ... in a diamond shape”
Fish harvester: might catch fish, but might also be the one that cleans/processes them and isn't actually involved in pulling the fish out of the water
That's not exponentially more (which would be a preposterous 2^1000 or 10^1000 years old). It's just 100 times more. Should I stop being annoyed at how media use the word and just accept their alternative meaning of "a lot" ?
Yes, it just means "a lot".
Possibly, because if I read between the lines, their answer is “huh I dunno”.
1*10^n
There is no exponential growth there, just someone not having any clue about the iceberg wanting to sound knowledgeable about the subject.
Yeah, exponential growth!!!
Journalists tend to just think of it as "a lot more", but since they didn't specify the base of the exponential we can at least find a way to make the article technically correct. There are fun classes that admit incomparable values, such as the Surreal games. If they'd said "the game {1 | -1} is exponentially more than { | }" then it'd be impossible to find a base to make the statement true. There's lots of fun to be had with this sort of math, as you know.
Exponentially more!
At least he didn't say logarithmically more
it's just a figure of speech, (used like some people (ab)use "literally"), which I am sure you know, considering your profile, or even otherwise.
other people than the media use it too:
e.g. this Rob Pike post about Go (the programming language, not the game you like):
Less is exponentially more
https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponenti...