Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Japanese Tsunami Ghost Ship Spotted Off Canadian Coast

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the fox-mulder-investigates-discovers-terrible-plot dept.

Japan 145

An anonymous reader writes with an excerpt from an article in Inhabitat: "After Japan was hit with a devastating earthquake in March 2011, the Pacific nation was rocked by a massive tsunami that destroyed thousands of coastal houses, cars and boats and swept millions of tons of debris out into the ocean. Now, it looks like some of that debris could be approaching North America. Last week, an unmanned boat identified as a Japanese fishing vessel was spotted off the coast of Canada, indicating that after more than a year, some of that debris could still be on its way to American and Canadian shores."

cancel ×

145 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"Last week" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555219)

That would be "last week" from last week when inhabitat got the story a week late? The boat was sighted March 20th.

Re:"Last week" (5, Funny)

able1234au (995975) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555311)

It's the Marie-san Celeste

Re:"Last week" (0)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555923)

At least all the radioactive particulates ejected from Fukushima will make it glow in the dark and be highly spooky, if not clearly visible at night.

Re:"Last week" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556653)

It's what the Japanese call "sento erumozu faya."

Re:"Last week" (1)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555939)

Or even the Marie, sans Celeste.

Re:"Last week" (5, Insightful)

jamrock (863246) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556847)

It's the Marie-san Celeste

I think you mean the "Maru Celeste".

Re:"Last week" (2, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555313)

That would be "last week" from last week when inhabitat got the story a week late? The boat was sighted March 20th.

Ha. Wait until next week. "Ghost Ship Closing In on American Coast!".

Slashdot will report that sometime in August.

Re:"Last week" (1)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555775)

Slashdot: News for people who don't follow the news.

Re:"Last week" (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556971)

You seem to be forgetting that they're operating on quantum nuclear irradiated ghost time. You have to compensate for that in the math. Let me see here...um...it seems that once you adjust for irradiated Japanese ship ghosts displaced in quantum reality it actually occurred...it hasn't occurred yet. It will occur next week lol.

Always first out with the news (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555227)

Everyone else reported this two weeks ago. Can't wait for Slashdot's report on the Moon landing.

FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (5, Funny)

Karl Cocknozzle (514413) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555231)

FOR SALE

One slightly used Fishing Trawler. Low hours, 2x Marine Diesels that ran like a dream when last started.
There has been some maintenance deferred last season, but otherwise perfect.
All controls Japanese.

$3,000,000 obo.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555473)

Do you have clean title?
Yeah, this is a bigger question than what is looks like

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (4, Interesting)

scheme (19778) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555813)

Do you have clean title? Yeah, this is a bigger question than what is looks like

The parent isn't far off from the truth. I think salvage law would award a moderately large percentage (20-50%) of the value of the ship to anyone that boards and salvages the ship. Even a crappy boat would probably be worth six figures so any salvage crews could be looking at a decent amount of money if they succeed.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555987)

I would think a greater percentage - it has essentially been abandoned with no attempts ( at least not reported ) to recover.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (1)

utkonos (2104836) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555997)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but salvage law only begins to apply when a vessel has sunk.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (4, Informative)

scheme (19778) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556017)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but salvage law only begins to apply when a vessel has sunk.

Nope, from my understanding it also applies to ships in distress or which are sinking or those that have been abandoned.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (1)

_Shad0w_ (127912) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556801)

You're correct, as far as I know. One of the requirements for being part of an RNLI crew is that you relinquish salvage rights to vessels you aid.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556165)

Oh, no, you're NOT trying THAT [guardian.co.uk] again!

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556783)

Nope. Almost as soon as a vessel is abandoned (and even before in some situations) it is potentially salvageable under various justifications, but if ownership can be determined there are rules for how the ship can be disposed of before any title can pass to a new owner. Basically, you can salvage it, but that doesn't mean you own it, although it does mean you are entitled to some compensation from the owner before they can retake possession of it. Even if the vessel is crewed salvage fees may still be owed. More details here [wikipedia.org] .

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (2)

cifey (583942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556231)

Does it have gas or nucular power?

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (4, Funny)

alienzed (732782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556493)

Stop Trawling.

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556821)

"...Not responsible for trauma caused by ghosts, dead bodies, or any other Halloween-like apparitions."

Re:FOR SALE: Fishing Trawler (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556981)

Do the nuclear irradiated Japanese quantum displaced ship ghosts come standard or is that extra in the fine print?

I love Slashdot (5, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555233)

The thing I love most about Slashdot is that they wait until I've completely forgotten reading a story before they post it, so its like a whole new experience.

Ninja Pirate Ghosts (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555237)

Ninja Fucking Pirate FuckiNG Ghosts, eh!

Unmanned (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555267)

> Last week, an unmanned boat identified as a Japanese fishing vessel

I'm confused. Does this ship have ghosts on it or not?

Re:Unmanned (4, Funny)

zAPPzAPP (1207370) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555303)

It is swarming with ghost fish.
Equip your holy weapons, physical damage can't hurt them.

Ship travelling with currents means (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555485)

I wouldn't worry so much about the ship and ghosts that may be on it or not, but rather about the three-eyed fish and two-headed sharks, that will be following in it's wake.

Re:Ship travelling with currents means (1)

Larryish (1215510) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555525)

As a Japanese fishing vessel, it is more likely to be crewed by little bitty one-eyed snakes.

Re:Unmanned (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556997)

Recent research has shown that the standard procedure of forcing the ghost fish to watch entire seasons of Japanese anime nonstop will also be ineffective in this particular case. WHAT WILL WE DO?!?! oh wait, the Sex in the City movie is out on DVD. That'll send em swimming.

Re:Unmanned (5, Funny)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555319)

Don't be silly!

...

Obviously, the ghosts were women.

Re:Unmanned (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556159)

I know you're trying to be funny but just in case... A ghost ship usually refers to a ship that has been abandoned, aka unmanned. A ship full of ghosts would be a haunted ship.

Re:Unmanned [vs. unghosted] (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556841)

A ghost ship usually refers to a ship that has been abandoned, aka unmanned...

Let's see how this works:

1. Ghosts are not men

2. Socrates is a man

3. Socrates died

4. Therefore, Socrates is a dead man

5. Therefore, Socrates is not a ....

Ah hell, never mind.

Re:Unmanned (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556421)

> Last week, an unmanned boat identified as a Japanese fishing vessel

I'm confused. Does this ship have ghosts on it or not?

He said unmanned, not unghosted.

Re:Unmanned (2)

alienzed (732782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556515)

All the ghosts were female.

Re:Unmanned (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556851)

I'm confused. Does this ship have ghosts on it or not?
Yes, but only Scooby-Doo ghosts.

no ghosts (1)

eyenot (102141) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555295)

if (!deadPeopleOnBoard) ship.ghost = false;

LAME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555413)

Code? Good grief. LAME!

Re:no ghosts (4, Funny)

ThePeices (635180) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555477)

Protip; write efficient code:

ghosts = false;

Re:no ghosts (2)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555717)

Bah, speak for yourself!

While.boat=isfloating.for.each.members(as member).while.member=dead.for.each.limbs(as limb).check(necrosis).if(necrosis is not apparent).ask(member.name()).if(member.name is just a bunch of GRAWLWLW and stuff).determined=ghosts.

Now THAT'S a statement!

Re:no ghosts (2)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555897)

Scope creep. Looks like someone lost the SOW.

Re:no ghosts (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555751)

What if it's in a while(ship.ghost){} loop?

Or worse, while(ship.ghost=ship.total) {}? :p

Re:no ghosts (1)

Pirulo (621010) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556055)

> ghosts.nil?
> true

Sweet! (2)

DSS11Q13 (1853164) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555299)

Free boat!

Re:Sweet! (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555471)

Well, maritime salvage laws probably apply... so, yeah. Free boat!

Re:Sweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556021)

No maritime salvage laws do not apply. They only apply after the registered owner is contacted to see if they want it back.

Re:Sweet! (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556429)

No maritime salvage laws do not apply. They only apply after the registered owner is contacted to see if they want it back.

And, actually, they did locate the owner and he said he did NOT want it back.

Re:Sweet! (4, Informative)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556181)

Well, maritime salvage laws probably apply... so, yeah. Free boat!

Actually, now that I've done some googling, I'll have to retract my statement. No free boat for you!

The popular belief that a salvor becomes the owner of the property, at least if it was abandoned by the owner or was derelict, is erroneous. The owner may always reclaim his property from the salvor on paying salvage money. The salvor, for his part, has a maritime lien on the salved property (in an amount determined by national statute or juridical custom) and need not return the property to the owner until his claim is satisfied or until security to meet an award is given. An owner who elects not to reclaim his property cannot be made liable for a salvage reward.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/519995/salvage [britannica.com]

The objects salvaged always remain the property of the original owner, but the original owner is responsible for compensating the salvor (person doing the salvaging) for their time, effort, and the danger they went through to salvage the property. So if you find a 5 million dollar yacht that has slipped loose from its moorings and is adrift, you do not get to claim it. (Which is a good thing if it is your 5 million dollar yacht which your bone-head brother-in-law borrowed but then, like an idiot, forgot to drop anchor when he took the tender ashore to go to a party, get wasted, and find with some bubble-headed island girl half his age to spend the night with.) However, you can hold onto it until the owner pays you for the boat's retrieval.

Having said that, apparently the owner of the boat no longer wants it back, so the question of ownership is up in the air.

Re:Sweet! (2)

scheme (19778) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556227)

You don't get to claim ownership but if you get to keep possession until the owner gives you a percentage of the vessel's worth as compensation for rescuing the boat, that's still pretty nice. I'd be fine with 10% of the value of that yacht for boarding it and bringing it back to shore. If the conditions are hazardous, you get more. However, this is according to wikipedia and you'd probably have to consult a maritime attorney to get a more definitive answer.

Re:Sweet! (1)

chrismcb (983081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556259)

Having said that, apparently the owner of the boat no longer wants it back, so the question of ownership is up in the air.

I believe you just laid out the rules of ownership. The owner still owns it. Whoever salvages has a maritime lien, and apparently the owner has already said he won't pay it.

Re:Sweet! (2)

Karl Cocknozzle (514413) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556377)

Having said that, apparently the owner of the boat no longer wants it back, so the question of ownership is up in the air.

I believe you just laid out the rules of ownership. The owner still owns it. Whoever salvages has a maritime lien, and apparently the owner has already said he won't pay it.

He probably already got an insurance settlement and replaced it, so getting this "lost" boat back could create a PITA situation for himself... and really, who knows what shape its in after drifting across the Pacific... It's been adrift for a year. I understand why he doesn't want it back.

Re:Sweet! (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556685)

Thing is, the owner may have put in a claim with an insurance company, in which case the insurance company may now be the owner, depending on how the law works in Japan. Complicating matters is the report that the wreck is drifting north-east and has crossed into US waters. The US coast guard may decide to sink the vessel, as it is heading towards some busy shipping lanes. They have dropped a marker buoy onto the ship.

Re:Sweet! (1)

_Shad0w_ (127912) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556833)

I suspect an insurance company probably technically owns it now. I doubt they want it either - its scrap value after paying any salvor's fee probably wouldn't make it worth it.

automated fishing ships by google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555331)

this is the flagship in googles new project for automated fishing vessels
successfuly launched from japan via massive natrual disaster and scheduled to land in north america sometime this week

Want a ship? (4, Funny)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555357)

You know I can't grab your ghost ships.

Re:Want a ship? (2)

PessimysticRaven (1864010) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555581)

Seriously? No one but this ONE lone comment?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9A0jZef5ZmI [youtube.com]

Re:Want a ship? (3, Interesting)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555887)

I was actually referring to this... [youtube.com]

Re:Want a ship? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555949)

awesome bro')

Re:Want a ship? (1)

Flere Imsaho (786612) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556437)

Spoon!

Reminder (0)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555369)

Public safety officials warn that Japanese tsunami debris washing up on Pacific shores may be radioactive.

Re:Reminder (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555511)

Thats most likely uneducated speculation rather than fact. The meltdown didn't occur until well after the Tsunami swept everything out. The reality is all that debris was swept out to sea well before the plant melted down a week later. The radioactive materials leaked into the ocean weeks after the earthquake and would have been dispersed locally not on boats and stuff swept out by the tsunami.

Re:Reminder (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555623)

Public safety officials tend to be conservative with unknowns. This debris was not that far offshore and directly downwind from three nuclear meltdowns with considerable airborne release of radioactive material. People should use due care when interacting with it.

Re:Reminder (4, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555761)

Most of the initial material release was Iodine, the vast majority of which has since decayed.

Of course, your statements are completely un-sourced so unless you can link to such a statement you either tried, and failed, to be funny or are just spreading nonsense.

Re:Reminder (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556143)

Oh wow, you're right. I remember reading initial reports expressing concern, but apparently NOAA has given the all clear. [noaa.gov] Never mind.

Re:Reminder (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556521)

Oh wow, you're right. I remember reading initial reports expressing concern, but apparently NOAA has given the all clear. Never mind.

Uh, yeah. About that. From your link:

There is consensus among scientists that this is highly unlikely, for several reasons:

[...]

For more information on radiation monitoring and safety, go to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Right. The EPA and the FDA. So the consensus is among EPA and FDA scientists? Someone else can go out there and get that shit.

Re:Reminder (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556749)

Good job on your illiteracy. Note the bit you quoted:

For more information on radiation monitoring and safety, go to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Italics mine. They're pointing people to those sites for additional information on the topics of radiation monitoring and safety. Neither the EPA nor FDA have a hand in this. Good job at failing utterly at reading comprehension in favor of omgnuke paranoia.

Re:Reminder (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555819)

But it makes for great copy on the Tee Vee:

"Killer Japanese Debris Headed for the West Coast! Film at 11!"

Don't go explore it! (1)

Zorque (894011) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555371)

We all know that's how horror movies start.

Re:Don't go explore it! (4, Funny)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555411)

That ship will begin the zombie apocalypse.

Re:Don't go explore it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556663)

Correction.

Nuclear Zombie Apocalypse! Much more intriguing, isn't it?

Re:Don't go explore it! (2)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556877)

That's the spirit! It glows with excitement; a tasty treat for the mind's eye.

Re:Don't go explore it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555433)

We all know that's how horror movies start.

Meh [imdb.com]

It could have been a great seafaring adventure story instead. And adventure movies can be seen more than once - not so much with horror and mystery movies.

Re:Don't go explore it!(Spoiler in post) (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555475)

It did have one or 2 freaky moments. And at the end when she's being carried off the cruise ship and sees what's his name and the gold being loaded on board was kinda cool. But yeah, it could have been executed better, but it could also have been a lot worse.

Re:Don't go explore it!(Spoiler in post) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555845)

Please just shut your fucking asshole until you learn something about film. Turds like you have ruined the industry.

Re:Don't go explore it! (4, Funny)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555613)

What was made public about the ship, that she was a Japanese fishing trawler, that she was swept out to sea in a tsunami and was lost... none of that is true. The ship was a secret government project to create a fishing trawler capable of faster-than-light travel. The ship doesn't really go faster than light. It creates a gateway to jump instantaneously from one point to another oceans away. It's called a gravity drive. I built it.

The mission was going perfectly, they reached safe distance using conventional engines. They had the go-ahead to use the gravity drive and open the gateway to Antarctic whaling waters. And then, they just disappeared, vanished without a trace.

Until now.

Re:Don't go explore it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555849)

Liberate tute mei ex inferese?

Sink it (2)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555467)

an unmanned boat identified as a Japanese fishing vessel was spotted off the coast of Canada,

Use it for torpedo practice. Once it floats into your territorial waters just sink the damn thing. Problem solved.

Re:Sink it (2)

darrenm (1632751) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555637)

We couldn't if we wanted to. We only buy overpriced, used subs from Britain that aren't safe, let alone ready for combat. Currently we don't have any submarines that have attack capabilities... so if you want to take over Canada, now is the time. http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/74078-second-hand-subs-bad-deal-canada-says-british-mp [thechronicleherald.ca]

Re:Sink it (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555875)

I think we have only 1 working sub right now out of the deal.

In a submarine war, we'll use strong words in 2 official languages no less to express how displeased we are. When all else fails, we'll apologize and surrender in English or French too.

Re:Sink it (-1, Troll)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555971)

That's what you get when you speak the language of the Cheese Eating Surrender Monkies.

Re:Sink it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556931)

Yes, one sub. First fired a torpedo [www.cbc.ca] literally a couple of weeks ago on March 16th, more than 10 years after buying them. It launched an unarmed dummy torpedo, but, hey, maybe now they'll try some real practice.

Re:Sink it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555915)

Even Canadians shouldn't need a submarine to sink an unmanned fishing vessel.

Just get a member of the Canucks to sink a puck in it.

Re:Sink it (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555921)

The problem will be solved when an abandoned Japanese sub washes up on the pacific shore, fully armed.

Re:Sink it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556307)

And then you realize the crew was in suspended animation.

Either that or they're Vampire Ninjas.

Re:Sink it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556533)

We had just that thing happen in December of '41 .. We put it in a museum. I guess the Japanese don't want it back

Re:Sink it (4, Funny)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556197)

Pfff, that may be true on the east coast, but over here in BC we have war canoes armed to the teeth with rabid beaver catapults. Attack at your own risk!

Re:Sink it (2)

Maow (620678) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556375)

an unmanned boat identified as a Japanese fishing vessel was spotted off the coast of Canada,

Use it for torpedo practice. Once it floats into your territorial waters just sink the damn thing. Problem solved.

Except for the oil & diesel leak we'd have created in our own waters.

And the loss of salvage or scrap value.

And the cost of the torpedo, unless a practice shot is, in fact, useful.

Probably a few better things could be done with it.

Re:Sink it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556441)

That's called pollution.

Sounds like my ex-girlfriend (1)

wiredog (43288) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555731)

Marie. Marie Celeste.

To hell with Armageddon... (1)

Stizark (1962342) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555757)

It's Ragnarok:

A ship journeys from the east, Muspell's people are coming,
over the waves, and Loki steers
There are the monstrous brood with all the raveners,
The brother of Byleist is in company with them.

Alright, not really. But I do take this as a sign my imagination still works.

YAY !! MORE CHEAP ASIAN CRAP !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39555837)

At least it's only Candida's problem !! We in America know good crap when we see it, and that shit don't cut the mustard !!

Its already taken care of (1)

hedgemage (934558) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555873)

Nothing to worry about. Apparently the case of the Japanese Ghost Fishermen has been resolved by four teenagers and their great dane. Old Man McGee was responsible for the whole mess and was apparently trying to distract attention from his illegal human trafficking operations.

Re:Its already taken care of (2)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555889)

Nothing to worry about. Apparently the case of the Japanese Ghost Fishermen has been resolved by four teenagers and their great dane. Old Man McGee was responsible for the whole mess and was apparently trying to distract attention from his illegal human trafficking operations.

You ever notice how they never uncovered any drug smuggling rings?

Re:Its already taken care of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556253)

And they would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for those damn kids.

Old man Mcgee says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556345)

damnit, if it wasnt for those meddling kids I'd have something to post on Slashdot!

Re:Its already taken care of (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556937)

And they would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for those damned Pikachus.

Freaking Canadians (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39556239)

Their going to be getting all of the good stuff. Here on the Washington coast
I guess we be getting the lighter stuff, like bodies and stuffed Pokémon's.

Waiting for it to hit the US (1, Informative)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556401)

The location, 150 miles south of the Haida Gwaii islands, is about 200 miles west of Vancouver. The currents along the Pacific coast of North America run southward, so the ship is going to drift into US waters soon. The U.S. will probably get stuck with the bill for towing the thing before it hits something. It's floating high in the water, so the hull is in good shape.

But.... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39556923)

Does it run Linux?

How about Ghostscript?
     

Re:But.... (1)

EnsilZah (575600) | more than 2 years ago | (#39557057)

Well, I'm pretty sure any scripting for it would have to run in the shell.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?