Skip to main content

Are Supershear Earthquakes Even More Dangerous Than We Thought?

2 weeks 2 days ago
Long-time Slashdot reader Bruce66423 shared this article from the Los Angeles Times: Scientists have increasingly observed how the rupturing of a fault during an earthquake can be even faster than the speed of another type of damaging seismic wave, theoretically generating energy on the level of a sonic boom. These shock waves — created during "supershear" earthquakes — can worsen how bad the ground shakes both side to side and up and down along an affected fault area, scientists at USC, Caltech and the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign wrote in a recent opinion article for the journal Seismological Research Letters. Although not everyone agrees that supershear earthquakes are inherently more destructive than other types, the potential implications are massive and need to be accounted for in seismic forecasts, the scientists contend... In just the last 15 years, 14 of 39 large strike-slip earthquakes have exhibited features of supershear ruptures, the opinion article said.... In California, supershear earthquakes would be expected on the straightest of "strike-slip" faults — in which one block of earth slides past another — like the San Andreas... There are a number of communities directly on top of the San Andreas fault. Among them are Coachella, Indio, Cathedral City, Palm Springs, Desert Hot Springs, Banning, Yucaipa, Highland, San Bernardino, Wrightwood, Palmdale, Gorman, Frazier Park, San Juan Bautista, Palo Alto, Portola Valley, Woodside, San Bruno, South San Francisco, Pacifica, Daly City and Bodega Bay. One earthquake scientist suggests building codes need to be more strict, according to the article. But it also cites a U.S. Geological Survey research geophysicist who isn't convinced by the new opinion article. "I don't think we know yet whether supershear ruptures really are more destructive."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid

FSF Reminds Consumers That Truly Free OS's Exist

2 weeks 2 days ago
"Microsoft does everything in its power to keep Windows users under its control," warns the Free Software Foundation in a new blog post this week. They argue that the lack of freedom that comes with proprietary code "forces users to surrender to decisions made by Microsoft to maximize its profits and further lock users into its product ecosystem" — describing both the problem and one possible solution: [IT management company Lansweeper] found that of the 30 million enterprise systems they manage, over 40% are incompatible with Windows 11. This is due to the hardware requirements like Treacherous Platform Module version 2.0 — a proprietary chip that uses cryptography that users can't influence or audit to restrict their control over the system. The end of Windows 10 support is the perfect opportunity to break free from this cycle and switch to GNU/Linux operating system (GNU/Linux OS), a system that respects your freedom... The endless, freedom-restricting cycle of planned obsolescence is not inevitable. Instead of paying Microsoft for continued updates or buying new hardware, Windows users left behind by Microsoft should install GNU/Linux. Free Software Foundation certified GNU/Linux distributions respect the user's freedom to run their computer as they wish, to study and modify its source code, and to redistribute copies. They don't require update contracts, often run faster on older hardware, and, most importantly, put you in control. "If you're already a GNU/Linux user, you have an important role to play. Help your friends and family make the switch by sharing your knowledge, help them install a free-as-in-freedom OS. Show them what it means to have real control over their computing!"

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid