<story><title>Warm liquid from Oregon seafloor comes from Cascadia fault</title><url>https://www.washington.edu/news/2023/04/10/warm-liquid-spewing-from-oregon-seafloor-comes-from-cascadia-fault-could-offer-clues-to-earthquake-hazards/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>billiam</author><text>Geologist here (by training). I know HN readers are instant experts on everything, except reading the entire article I guess. All the geoengineering suggestions are amusing, but there is nothing we can do about the (hypothetical) stress buildup on the Cascadia Fault. There are lots of ways to measure stress and determine which segments of a fault are locked, this direct observation of a single seep being one very anecdotal example. We have instrumented and observed the hell out of other faults for decades, and we have increased our ability to predict earthquakes by ~0%.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pasquinelli</author><text>&amp;gt; we have increased our ability to predict earthquakes by ~0%.&lt;p&gt;but what if we use chatGPT, or perhaps crypto?</text></comment>
<story><title>Warm liquid from Oregon seafloor comes from Cascadia fault</title><url>https://www.washington.edu/news/2023/04/10/warm-liquid-spewing-from-oregon-seafloor-comes-from-cascadia-fault-could-offer-clues-to-earthquake-hazards/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>billiam</author><text>Geologist here (by training). I know HN readers are instant experts on everything, except reading the entire article I guess. All the geoengineering suggestions are amusing, but there is nothing we can do about the (hypothetical) stress buildup on the Cascadia Fault. There are lots of ways to measure stress and determine which segments of a fault are locked, this direct observation of a single seep being one very anecdotal example. We have instrumented and observed the hell out of other faults for decades, and we have increased our ability to predict earthquakes by ~0%.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ggm</author><text>I think in part this is because of a mode of discourse based on questions by assertion: I know a small factoid, I got it from IFLS, I repeat it here, there is an implicit question.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;so if we dumped 30 megatonnes of concrete over the fault we&amp;#x27;d alter the compression ratio of the subsoils and this would stop the coming mega-quake&amp;quot; because I read once that big buildings alter readings on somebody&amp;#x27;s seismograph, somewhere, once.&lt;p&gt;Mind you, geologists do it by reverse: I nice one I know from U Qld told me the economic upsides of the San Diego quake were net positive. I&amp;#x27;m not sure all economists agree!</text></comment>