The Really Big One • Hacker News Board

Re: The Really Big One

#41

Post by Locke1689 » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:18 PM UTC

serve_yay wrote: post #29

Locke1689 wrote: post #20

Hmm, in the spirit of thinking of worst-case scenarios, most of the engineering talent for Amazon and Microsoft is in Seattle and Redmond, respectively. There's even a sizable percentage of Google cloud platform in Fremont and Kirkland. Even if most of the employees live, it's likely basic infrastructure will be a disaster for quite a while. Maybe Google would be able to offload ops work to Mountain View, but it seem…

That does seem likely, though as far as I know, AWS's biggest zone is located in Northern Virginia. And, I'm sure the AWS people have planned as much as they can for this eventuality. (Um, I hope.)

I doubt the datacenter's locations matter. The services at the bottom of the stack need constant ops to stay alive. With most of the engineers out, I expect barely a few days to go by before one of the essential services needs servicing.

Re: The Really Big One

#42

Post by jsprogrammer » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:19 PM UTC

sharkweek wrote: post #10

Well this article at least justifies that perhaps we don't need to replace the viaduct after all if everything is going to get destroyed anyways! While my fear of "the big one" doesn't keep me up at night, Seattle is going to be a classic example of "we should have known this was going to happen!" after a sizable earthquake costs substantial life at some point in the future. But this article does seem to stretch itse…

"We take earthquake safety seriously, but earlier today..."

Re: The Really Big One

#43

Post by PaulyGlott » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:29 PM UTC

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #19

NDizzle wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am hitting their pay wall by occasionally clicking links from HN. I never read the full articles, but I skim roughly 4x the amount of information provided before the pay wall. It's not worth the full price for me. I'd like a happy medium.

So, your medium is free content as often as you want it? What's in it for them?

There's no shortage of advertising on The New Yorker.

Re: The Really Big One

#44

Post by mathgenius » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:34 PM UTC

MrZongle2 wrote: post #38

iamjs wrote: post #15

Does the New Yorker just inject random comics into their stories? None of these illustrations appear to be related to the content.

It's worse than that: none of those illustrations appear to be related to humor . Edit: Looks like we've got a couple of New Yorker cartoon aficionados on HN. I guess I'll have to save my stinging comments for edgier content, such as Doonsbury and Garfield. /s

Yeah it is some kind if weird palette cleanse.

Re: The Really Big One

#45

Post by jsprogrammer » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:39 PM UTC

civilian wrote: post #18

sharkweek wrote: post #10

Well this article at least justifies that perhaps we don't need to replace the viaduct after all if everything is going to get destroyed anyways! While my fear of "the big one" doesn't keep me up at night, Seattle is going to be a classic example of "we should have known this was going to happen!" after a sizable earthquake costs substantial life at some point in the future. But this article does seem to stretch itse…

The viaduct's collapse in the next big earthquake and the ~80 lives it'll take is the _reason_ we're building something as a replacement! Granted, Bertha is a huge fuckup. A MBA in my python night class said that one approach to the viaduct problem would be to: fund a "victims of the viaduct" fund, today, with a couple million. And then pass a law that the compensation for families of the victims is limited to what's…

>A MBA in my python night class said that one approach to the viaduct problem would be to: fund a "victims of the viaduct" fund, today, with a couple million. And then pass a law that the compensation for families of the victims is limited to what's in the fund.

What exactly is the "viaduct problem"?

Re: The Really Big One

#46

Post by civilian » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:43 PM UTC

jsprogrammer wrote: post #45

civilian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The viaduct's collapse in the next big earthquake and the ~80 lives it'll take is the _reason_ we're building something as a replacement! Granted, Bertha is a huge fuckup. A MBA in my python night class said that one approach to the viaduct problem would be to: fund a "victims of the viaduct" fund, today, with a couple million. And then pass a law that the compensation for families of the victims is limited to what's…

>A MBA in my python night class said that one approach to the viaduct problem would be to: fund a "victims of the viaduct" fund, today, with a couple million. And then pass a law that the compensation for families of the victims is limited to what's in the fund. What exactly is the "viaduct problem"?

It's going to collapse in the next big earthquake.

//edit: and here's a simulation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hos_uIKwC-c

Re: The Really Big One

#47

Post by sasvari » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:45 PM UTC

interurban wrote: post #28

For a good read on another somewhat overlooked seismic zone: http://idlewords.com/2015/07/confronting_new_madrid.htm Most people don't think of the midwest/great plains states as being seismically active, but they're home to some of the most geologically interesting history in the United States.

surfaced here just 3 days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9862451

Re: The Really Big One

#48

Post by iamcurious » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:47 PM UTC

kenferry wrote: post #35

Is there any work on inducing earthquakes to relieve stress before it builds to catastrophe levels?

I like how you think. If we are going to have an earthquake, at the very least we should have an scheduled organized mild one.

Re: The Really Big One

#49

Post by alxv » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:47 PM UTC

Locke1689 wrote: post #20

Hmm, in the spirit of thinking of worst-case scenarios, most of the engineering talent for Amazon and Microsoft is in Seattle and Redmond, respectively. There's even a sizable percentage of Google cloud platform in Fremont and Kirkland. Even if most of the employees live, it's likely basic infrastructure will be a disaster for quite a while. Maybe Google would be able to offload ops work to Mountain View, but it seem…

Google runs a company-wide disaster recovery testing event every year. Earthquakes are among the numerous scenarios simulated.

https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2371516

Re: The Really Big One

#50

Post by NotSammyHagar » Mon, Jul 13, 2015, 6:50 PM UTC

nkoren wrote: post #27

I used to live in Portland, and thought about this impending catastrophe a lot. Once -- under the influence of intoxicants, most likely -- I came up with a way of dramatically reducing its impact. It's a batshit crazy solution which will never actually happen -- but even when I'm sober, I still think it would work. Here's what I'm thinking: the major problem with a disaster like this is the uncertainty surrounding it…

Hydraulic fracturing is now known as a way to cause earthquakes. What if we start fracking around the NW fault zones to cause one? Of course, how do you lubricate it just enough to cause a small quake but not the giant one?

Fortunately, Oklahoma, with their anti-science "we don't believe in global warming and we are against figuring out what is causing these not seen for 100 year earthquakes" is testing out exactly how to cause them.

Thanks Oklahoma! (this should replace thanks Obama in the lexicon).