Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Really Big One

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 286 posts

Re: The Really Big One

#71

Post by falcolas »

idlewords wrote: post #57
alxv wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The problem is that you can't really simulate the systemic effects of a really major quake (like a scenario where Mountain View is out of power for weeks).

Sure you can. Just look for the keys to the main breakers to those buildings. Of course, paying for that amount of vacation for 15 days is probably not entirely feasible for any company.

Re: The Really Big One

#72

Post by nostrademons »

idlewords wrote: post #57
alxv wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The problem is that you can't really simulate the systemic effects of a really major quake (like a scenario where Mountain View is out of power for weeks).

The DiRT drills include the simultaneous loss of whole offices, including the complete obliteration of the Bay Area. Participants are instructed to pretend that they've been eaten by zombies and not communicate with anyone in a remote office, and that's backed up (as described in the article) by cutting the network links to & from the Mountain View corporate office.

Now, there may certainly be larger systemic effects over long time periods caused by eg. the death of the company CEO, the loss of new product development, or the complete destruction of the company's market (in, for example, a global thermonuclear apocalypse that sets us back to the stone age). But the tests absolutely do simulate the simultaneous death of 15,000+ employees, destruction of the Mountain View headquarters, and loss of all datacenters, data, and power in the Bay Area, and verify that remote teams can continue the day-to-day operations in such an event.

Re: The Really Big One

#73

Post by olefoo »

[deleted] wrote: post #25
saintgimp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be significant damage from water all around inland Puget Sound, though I agree not on the scale of the full-blown tsunami on the coast. Everything is going to shift 30 to 100 feet west over the course of a couple minutes - the water in Puget Sound is going to slosh around like crazy.

[deleted]

Large parts of downtown and the area between Queen Anne and Capitol Hill ( where the Amazon campus is ) are built on fill, and are likely to be subjected to liquefaction in a major seismic event. It's entirely possible that whole sections of Capitol Hill could slide into downtown too.

The hills shake and the mountains dance, and then comes the tsunami; this sounds much more exciting to read about than live through.

Re: The Really Big One

#74

Post by eCa »

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…

I'm not really sure why there should be tsunami walls etc built, since the howevermany scores of nukes it takes probably will leave large parts of the pacific northwest uninhabitable (either de facto or by choice) for a while.

So, it would be easier, cheaper and safer (but equally infeasible) to simply force resettlement of the population somewhere without a crack in the crust.

Re: The Really Big One

#75

Post by at-fates-hands »

It's interesting to see several articles about this recently. Ever since I was growing up in the 1970's, they've been talking about "the big one".

Here's the 1979 show "In Seach Of" discussing it:

Leonard Nimoy's narration is top notch as always: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=148UfHK6pbs

At the time of the video, they said over 15 million people live along the various fault lines.

Re: The Really Big One

#77

Post by eCa »

someear wrote: post #56

I like to think about how I'd react in the 15 minutes I have between the earthquake and tsunami. How tall would this tsunami be? Quick googling shows the tallest one ever is 524 meters. Assuming the tsunami is that tall, going into tall buildings might not work - tallest building in Seattle, Columbia Tower, is 287 meters (+50m in elevation increase), and is a few blocks from the waterfront . Best bet is to run/bike u…

IANAS[1], but I believe one of the reasons why the Lituya Bay tsunami was so big was simply that the water had nowhere to go but up. In a more lowlandy situation the water would spread over much larger areas at a lower elevation. Also, considering Seattle's geographic position (away from the Pacific) I would be surprised if any big tsunami would hit Seattle directly.

A little bit of Googling found this[2]. The largest known tsunami to hit Seattle was 16ft, 1100 years ago.

That said, heading for the hills is probably a good choice anyway.

[1] Seismologist

[2] http://www.seattle.gov/emergency-management/what-if/hazards/...

Re: The Really Big One

#78

Post by ihsw »

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #70
someear wrote: post #56

I like to think about how I'd react in the 15 minutes I have between the earthquake and tsunami. How tall would this tsunami be? Quick googling shows the tallest one ever is 524 meters. Assuming the tsunami is that tall, going into tall buildings might not work - tallest building in Seattle, Columbia Tower, is 287 meters (+50m in elevation increase), and is a few blocks from the waterfront . Best bet is to run/bike u…

I wish I could find some definitive resources on whether or not a building would be considered safe in a tsunami, and if it would be better to go for higher floors or lower floors. I imagine that after such a large earth quake, many buildings would be unstable and potentially open to collapse from the force of a tsunami. I'm sure going to higher ground would be a better idea if possible, but say if it was iffy to get…

In addition to the risk of total collapse, there's also the risk that the remaining floors would be impassable.

Debris (furniture, broken walls, etc) can be a dangerous obstacle, especially when you have to traverse several/dozens of flights of stairs, much of which will be wet, muddy/dirty, and possible destroyed in some places. This danger magnifies when you have to evacuate large amounts of people of varying mobility (young, old, sick, or otherwise infirm).

Entrances and exits will be serious obstacles if not outright impassable, due to large amounts of debris and unknown/unstable physical integrity.

Tsunami evacuation and safety policies are outlined for movement and monitoring large groups of people, not just individuals.

With regards of where you should go -- go outside and move to higher ground.

Re: The Really Big One

#79

Post by Yen »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #51
civilian wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's what I assumed, but I didn't (and still don't) see how setting up a limited liability fund for future victims would prevent what is shown in that simulation.

I don't know if this is what the MBA was going for, but the idea might be -

Setting up the compensation fund cements the idea that the disaster is a 'when', not 'if'. Putting a small cap on compensation signals to people - if you're a victim, you might only get this amount of money. The overall effect being that people are actually motivated to vote for measures to fix the problem. e.g., I know I'll only get compensated for a small amount, thus, I want to make sure it's less likely I'm victimized.

Re: The Really Big One

#80

Post by michaelvkpdx »

Silicon Valley refugees and people complaining about Bay Area prices, please note that this is 100% true. Portland will be completely wiped out within the next couple years by a giant earthquake followed by a Sasquatch Apocalypse.

Don't move here. You will die. But please visit and enjoy your stay!

Love, Portland

Post reply on HN