New York Data Centers Battle Floods, Utility Outages

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New York Data Centers Battle Floods, Utility Outages

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday October 30, 2012 @07:11AM from the bunker-in-tight dept.

miller60 writes "At least three data center buildings in lower Manhattan are struggling with power problems amid widespread flooding and utility outages caused by Hurricane Sandy. Flooded basements at two sites took out diesel fuel pumps, leaving them unable to refuel generators on higher levels. One of these was Datagram, which knocked out Buzzfeed and the Gawker network of sites. At 111 8th Avenue, some tenants lost power when Equinix briefly experienced generator problems." The NY Times has a running list of Sandy-related problems, including 5,700 more flight cancellations, 6 million people without power, rising water levels at a nuclear plant, official disaster declarations from President Obama, and a death toll of 38. On the upside, and despite the high water levels, the Nuclear Energy Institute was quick to point out that all 34 nuclear facilities in Sandy's path made it through without problems.

186 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

oblig Kanye West by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:13 · Score: -1, Troll

Barack Obama doesn't care about white people.
1. Re:oblig Kanye West by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: 0
  
  idiot... troll somewhere else
2. Re:oblig Kanye West by SuperMooCow · 2012-10-30 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not even white, I'm off-white. We're a new race, we will prevail! - Mitch Hedberg
3. Re:oblig Kanye West by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:47 · Score: 0
  
  u mad bro?
Look at the bright side by AuMatar · 2012-10-30 07:14 · Score: 5, Interesting

If we're really lucky, it'll take out all the high frequency traders systems for a few days and we can have an actual market without parasites.
Nah, who am I kidding. If that actually happened they'd keep Wall Street closed.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
1. Re:Look at the bright side by Revotron · 2012-10-30 07:19 · Score: 2
  
  HFT systems are located as close to the exchange's servers as they physically can be, because all the marketeers think it's bad juju to have a ping time above .01ms.
  
  Needless to say, if the HFT systems go down, then the market's exchange servers 2 feet away will probably be down, as well.
  
  I'm afraid this is a battle we just can't win.
2. Re:Look at the bright side by girlintraining · 2012-10-30 07:22 · Score: 2
  
  Nah, who am I kidding. If that actually happened they'd keep Wall Street closed.
  Well, now that you mention it...
  
  --
  #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
3. Re:Look at the bright side by Laxori666 · 2012-10-30 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  The stock market has been closed for a few days now.
4. Re:Look at the bright side by jessehager · 2012-10-30 08:19 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Most of the traders try to get as close to the old Western Union Building at 60 Hudson St. as possible. If not inside it, in a building adjacent to it. That's the central network hub for the financial district.
5. Re:Look at the bright side by tlhIngan · 2012-10-30 09:44 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  HFT systems are located as close to the exchange's servers as they physically can be, because all the marketeers think it's bad juju to have a ping time above .01ms.
  Needless to say, if the HFT systems go down, then the market's exchange servers 2 feet away will probably be down, as well.
  
  If you're within the datacenter, there's a chance the trading computers are a bit further away from that actually. What happens is that the exchange actually ends up finding the longest cable they need to reach from the trading computer to the farthest rack, then they ensure that every cable from the trading computer any rack is that length. That way all the HFT traders who pay to be physically close in the data center aren't getting any advantage - there's just a huge coil of cable above the rack to ensure every rack gets the same latency. One could argue the coil of cable adds to latency by being an inductor, I suppose...
6. Re:Look at the bright side by amightywind · 2012-10-30 11:27 · Score: -1
  
  Or we may have a few days with less liquidity. Something to think about if you want to sell.
  
  --
  an ill wind that blows no good
7. Re:Look at the bright side by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 13:27 · Score: 0
  
  Nah, you're being way too optimistic.
  http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-hurricane-sandy-2012-10
  http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/goldman-sachs-survived-hurricane-sandy.html
  http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/12c7wg/a_lesson_in_how_the_world_works_the_only_building/
8. Re:Look at the bright side by kiwimate · 2012-10-30 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  1. Yeah, how dare they exercise fiduciary responsibility and actually prepare by buying generators?
  2. By the way, the pics you linked to clearly show other buildings with power as well.
  3. Also in one of those links (the nymag one), the spokesman says they were prepared, they were also very lucky, and oh yes, we know a lot of people aren't as lucky as us so we're going to help out in Battery Park City. Come to location XYZ for charging stations and bottled water.
9. Re:Look at the bright side by dintech · 2012-10-31 00:02 · Score: 1
  
  I work at a major bank and we've lost a data center in New York Plaza. It's flooded and has no power. However, we have backup systems and everything is running out of alternate sites. This is the kind of situation disaster recovery is actually implemented for.
10. Re:Look at the bright side by OdinOdin_ · 2012-10-31 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder how much money I could make with my Stanley knife optimization scheme, splice'n'dice!
Where are the mid-American datacenters by blueforce · 2012-10-30 07:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.? Surely the threat from Tornados could be mitigated and the electrical infrastructure built out more cheaply than the losses due to coastal disasters, no?

--
If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.
1. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:18 · Score: 0
  
  High frequency trading.
2. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by 54mc · 2012-10-30 07:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  If you're paying the premium to host in Manhattan, you're doing so because latency is a big deal to you.
  
  --
  Joy! Beautiful spark of the gods!
3. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by maxdread · 2012-10-30 07:21 · Score: 2
  
  You might be correct but keep in mind that there are other limitations as well. Cost and need for cooling, talent, price of utilities and infrastructure (not just utilities but potentially network related as well).
  However there has to be something behind the idea of data centers in the midwest, at the very least Iowa is home to a Google data center.
4. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:21 · Score: 0
  
  If latency mattered, you would be in NJ, not in Manhattan.
5. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by OverlordQ · 2012-10-30 07:21 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  > Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  There are, you just dont hear about them as often because they generally dont have anything newsworthy to report about them.
  
  --
  Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
6. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by firex726 · 2012-10-30 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  As I understand it, it's the availability of fiber. DC needs a fuck ton of fiber, and a big city is more likely to have it already present then some podunk town.
7. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Shatrat · 2012-10-30 07:25 · Score: 2
  
  The largest datacenter in the world is at 350 E Cermak Road in Chicago.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
8. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by ahem · 2012-10-30 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  To your point, if you were 1,450 miles away in the middle of Kansas, you'd have a 7.7 millisecond ping time just for speed-of-light latency if you ran redundant fiber from your DC directly to the exchange in Manhattan. Probably add some small amount of time for the network gear on each end of the connection.
  
  --
  Not A Sig
9. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by sunking2 · 2012-10-30 07:28 · Score: 1
  
  Because nobody wants to live there.
10. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Revotron · 2012-10-30 07:30 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  That's what Chicago is for. Far west enough to avoid most eastern seaboard troubles, far east enough to avoid the earthquakes, but central enough to provide good connectivity and ping times to both coasts.
  
  There are a few datacenters in Omaha, Nebraska, but they're either lights-out carrier-grade (Level3) or Fortune 500 warm-site backup grade. (CoSentry). They're also ungodly expensive because they're the only players in a 250 mile radius.
  
  Kansas City, MO has a good selection of datacenters for non-mission-critical systems, but most of the "data fortress" type places are built and run by the business that needs them.
  
  This is all completely ignoring the issue of latency, though - when you're doing financial transactions there's no better seat in the house than the heart of Wall Street. Every millisecond counts, I've been told.
11. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:32 · Score: 0
  
  How does One Wilshire in LA stack up connectivity-wise? Now this is some dense cabling.
12. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by wcrowe · 2012-10-30 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe. Except the idiots would probably put their data centers in basements, in the downtown areas of cities like Kansas City and Omaha, where the nearby river could inevitably flood them.
  I would want my data center in Denver.
  
  --
  Proverbs 21:19
13. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by bluefoxlucid · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  One bowl of Colon Blow has more fiber.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
14. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Shatrat · 2012-10-30 07:37 · Score: 2
  
  I couldn't say because the network I work on doesn't go that far west, but 350 E Cermak is the center of the Internet, if it has one.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
15. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by CanHasDIY · 2012-10-30 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  > Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  There are, you just dont hear about them as often because they generally dont have anything newsworthy to report about them.
  This.
  
  We in the midwest stick our data centers underground for a reason; several reasons, actually.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
16. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  Actually Conneticut because that is where all of the servers for high-volume trading is done, which requires nearly zero latency.
17. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  Surely the threat from Tornados could be mitigated and the electrical infrastructure built out more cheaply than the losses due to coastal disasters, no?
  Infobunker is in Iowa. Not the biggest data center I've hosted stuff in before, but probably the most awesome.
  Hint: it's in a Cold War era military bunker. The kind that would allow the Feds to keep operating if the Soviets nuked us. Cool info on their "Facility" page.
18. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Shatrat · 2012-10-30 07:52 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  5 microseconds per kilometer tends to be a pretty good approximation, depending on the transport gear.
  Things like FEC, EFEC, dispersion compensation modules (non-bragg grating type), frequent OEO regens can add up and make it worse.
  That would give you a ballpark of 11ms for a 1450 mile circuit.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
19. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:57 · Score: 0
  
  There are a ton of datacenters out in the midwest. A large amount of them however are DR sites.
20. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I work for a daatcenter in Kansas. I can tell you first hand that there are a lot of datacenters around here (Kansas City metro). If you aren't doing high speed trading, then you have no reason to not have a datacenter out here. Power is cheaper, space is cheaper, cost of living is cheaper, you don't have to worry about hurricanes or snow, most DCs are tornado proof, and connectivity here is WAY better than people know (and growing faster than any other area in the country). If latency is your primary concern though, then close to the source is your only option.
21. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by TWX · 2012-10-30 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.? Surely the threat from Tornados could be mitigated and the electrical infrastructure built out more cheaply than the losses due to coastal disasters, no?
  Probably because, first, more transmission lines are required to establish a backbone to there instead of just putting them where the bulk of the users already are, second, high tech work generally pays well, and thus high tech workers want to live somewhere exciting or with a lot to do, and third, large-scale coastal disasters have happened much less frequently than some of the midwest natural disasters.
  
  Some startups are getting smarter and including lower-cost cities to make it more affordable for the business, and some bigger companies do eventually place operations in less expensive places.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
22. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:07 · Score: 0
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  If you're paying the premium to host in Manhattan, you're doing so because latency is a big deal to you.
  Really? The latency of news websites, such as Gawker and Buzzfeed, matters?
23. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.? Surely the threat from Tornados could be mitigated and the electrical infrastructure built out more cheaply than the losses due to coastal disasters, no?
  NSA is building a data center in Utah: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/ Power is cheap, no floods, hurricanes or tornadoes, and evaporative cooling works fantastic.
24. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by h4rr4r · 2012-10-30 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  But you have to have someone live in Utah.
25. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by lennier · 2012-10-30 08:29 · Score: 2
  
  To your point, if you were 1,450 miles away in the middle of Kansas, you'd have a 7.7 millisecond ping time just for speed-of-light latency if you ran redundant fiber from your DC directly to the exchange in Manhattan.
  Welcome to the Internet as the rest of the world sees it - and why we're less than enthused about "cloud" when all the big servers aren't even on our continent. ;)
  
  --
  You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
26. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anamelech · 2012-10-30 08:30 · Score: 2
  
  Canada's got one too, in Nova Scotia. BastionHost is based in an old nuke bunker John Diefenbaker's administration made. Link(Site 100% Flash.)
27. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  Ah, so that's why Google didn't invest in KC...
28. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:34 · Score: 0
  
  That photo was taken after the cables were reorganized. For a while the place was so dark because of all the cabling overhead hardly let any light in.
  That being said that building is mostly used as an interconnection point between ISPs. There ARE several floors of data center as well that are mostly full that connect downstairs with amazing connection and latency speeds. But the cost of power is high and space is high. So generally cheaper to place servers somewhere else and then just buy space for your router there.
  So mostly not websites hosted there but things that need low ping times. VoIP providers, some MMO's, etc.
29. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:35 · Score: 0
  
  high tech work generally pays well
  Generally speaking, data center work doesn't pay well unless you're a network or storage guy. NOC techs make shit, server techs make slightly more than NOC techs, and that's about all you need in a data center because all that's required on-site is someone who can open a package, read some instructions, and turn a screwdriver. Cabling a server doesn't require a CCNA. So I'd venture to guess nobody in a data center makes more than $20/hour unless they're specialized in something.
  
  Please correct me if I'm wrong - this is just the impression I've gotten over the last few years of job hunting.
30. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:46 · Score: 0
  
  Really? The latency of news websites, such as Gawker and Buzzfeed, matters?
  No, but the latency affecting "First Post!" does.
31. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by QuantumRiff · 2012-10-30 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  Hahaha! good luck.. New York forgets there is a rest of the state, let alone anything past Philly..
  
  --
  
  What are we going to do tonight Brain?
32. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:11 · Score: 0
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  Surely the threat from Tornados could be mitigated and the electrical infrastructure built out more cheaply than the losses due to coastal disasters, no?
  Yeh, but what about motherfuckers with sawed-off .410s killing everything in their path?
33. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:31 · Score: 0
  
  New York is a major routing hub for transatlantic network traffic since that's where the undersea cables come ashore.
  Companies who need good network access links will locate there due to the wide availability of carriers.
  Data centres in central america would route traffic to Europe via NY anyway so you'd still have problems. If NY routes went entirely offline BGP should reroute everything via other routes (eg west coast + asia), but the route isn't built for that load and would likely be completely overloaded in doing so - leading to heavy packet loss all over.
  Incidentally there are plenty of data centres all over the US, it's simply that NY is a major area for them due to the availability of carriers and being close to other services. Any large companies generally will have a disaster recovery site elsewhere in case of a disaster just such as this one.
34. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:50 · Score: 0
  
  At least the beer they spill on their servers will be 3%
35. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:51 · Score: 0
  
  There isn't much bandwidth in those places. All the backbones run through NY, DC, Dallas, Chicago, Florida (not sure on the city) and Los Angeles
36. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 11:06 · Score: 0
  
  I don't believe Gawker is necessarily worried about latency or HFT. What they should worry about, though, is paying a higher premium for redundant hosting.
37. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Bing+Tsher+E · 2012-10-30 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, no. Thats not true. But we're glad your type doesn't want to live here. Twenty years ago I probably couldn't have stood living here in smalltown Indiana either, but electronic connectivity has changed everything. There's plenty of reachable culture and connectivity here in flyover country, without a lot of the downsides of dense urban living.
  But forget I said anything. Its better for me if you stay where you are.
38. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by sumdumass · 2012-10-30 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  lol.. No, they just like good BBQ pork.
39. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by petsounds · 2012-10-30 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  Makes sense for stock trading, but blogs like Gawker not so much.
40. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by smellotron · 2012-10-30 16:14 · Score: 1
  
  Why aren't there more datacenters in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, etc.?
  
  There are datacenters in the Chicago area, particularly for futures. Between these facilities and New York, the latest latency race is microwave relay towers. Any new stock exchange which decides to pop up and locate themselves in the Midwest has to fight the network effect to become relevant. In the long run (assuming they become popular enough to attract liquidity), they would only end up creating an additional opportunity for latency arbitrage in a big triangle between Chicago and New York. Overall, there is a lot of risk and very little value in starting up a new exchange in a brand-new location.
  OTOH, some of the existing exchanges do have off-site datacenters for disaster recovery. BATS's connectivity manual (PDF PDF DANGER WILL ROBINSON) lists three locations on p.14. With some digging you can probably find more for the other exchanges. Because the 2-day closure of the stock exchange appears to be a coordinated effort by the SEC, there was little incentive on Monday to actually use a disaster recover site. If a primary datacenter had serious problems during a normal trading day I bet any of the exchanges would fail over pretty quickly.
41. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Rhys · 2012-10-30 16:19 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know that either Chicago or Kansas City is really far enough from the new madrid fault to be considered safe. Things aren't built to CA earthquake standards around here, even something small(ish) by the time it reaches Chicago is going to do serious amounts of damage. Not to mention there are faults a lot closer that they know next to nothing about (see the higher risk zone west of Aurora at: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/illinois/hazards.php) so the margin of error on them could be ... large.
  As earthquakes go, a 5.1 in Aurora isn't big, but it was felt all over: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1909_05_26.php You make that a 6 or 7 because nobody really studies the fault system there and much of Chicago is going to be rubble.
  
  --
  Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
42. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 02:47 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, a someone who lives on one of the coasts is being an asshole on an online forum....
  I didn't see that coming
43. Re:Where are the mid-American datacenters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 03:56 · Score: 0
  
  For one because Kansas and Nebraska are in the middles of the tornado alley.
No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:16 · Score: -1

As another poster yesterday mentioned it was sunny and pleasant in Virginia just hours before landfall.
The airport simply closed as a precaution.. No nuclear power meltdowns or any catastrophy as the media reports.
So some waves hit the shoreline. Big deal. New York will funciton perfectly tomorrow like nothing ever happened.
This is as strong as a case forever to stop paying attention to the media.
1. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by swanzilla · 2012-10-30 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  HMS Bounty. Never forget.
  
  --
  0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
2. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by sglewis100 · 2012-10-30 07:25 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This is as strong as a case forever to stop paying attention to the media.
  Sounds like you already stopped paying attention. Had you even checked the one link in the article, or even read the summary, you'd know it was a catastophy, and New York will not function "perfectly tomorrow like nothing ever happened."
  
  Schools closed. Subways closed 4-5 days. 38 people dead. Market closed. Fire in Queens destroys dozens of homes. Power outages for millions. 7% of the US population in fact without power. Tunnels flooded (subway and car). NYU Tisch hospital evacuated due to flood related generator failures, including premature babies on ventilators. Just a small summary, of just one city.
  
  I'm a former NYer. Have spoken to many friends and family. None expect normal life tomorrow. Some have considerable property damage. None lost a life, thankfully. I live in South Florida, incidentally, and rather well understand how damaging hurricanes can be. Wilma damaged my car, and cancelled my wedding day as the roof caved in on the place we were getting married in that Friday.
  
  This is a rare strong case to NOT stop paying attention to the media.
3. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by AuMatar · 2012-10-30 07:27 · Score: 2
  
  They were idiots for going out to sea. Even if it was marginally safer for the boat to be at sea than in port for the storm, it was safer for the crew to be in port, or in hotel rooms 100 miles inland. Those people died due to a combination of greedy ownership that valued the ship more than the crew's safety and their own stupidity in not refusing. All this for a reproduction used in movie shoots. A senseless waste.
  
  --
  I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
4. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty sure the 38 deaths is for the entire region hit, not just NYC. But that said, 38 deaths over two days might be a decline in NYC's death rate over the same time period.
5. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by oh_my_080980980 · 2012-10-30 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  That's o.k. the guy is a first rate ass-hole. What do you expect from someone who posts anonymously.
6. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: 0
  
  You must not have seen the pictures of the new LaGuardia seaport.
7. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by NatasRevol · 2012-10-30 07:45 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  No 'might' about it.
  Death rate of NYC is around 1,000/week. or 140 per day.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
8. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by cayenne8 · 2012-10-30 07:46 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Hmm....boy, this doesn't speak well for the super dense urban living does it?
  Everyone depending on mass transportation...a little flooding and the city comes to a stand still?
  Hell, we get hit with Cat 1 level storms all the time in the Gulf south area...it is a major PITA, and I do feel for people that got flooded, it is horrible...but it *IS* part of living near the coast of an ocean.
  I hope everyone had flood insurance, it is dirt cheap.
  But really aside from the expected shoreline damage..this wasn't that bad of a storm. It appeared the media had to try to go out of their way to try to make areas where they were reporting look worse than it was. I mean, reporters not on the coast...barely had wind blowing, a little rain in the background....it wasn't THAT bad of a storm.
  But it does show the drawback of everyone proclaiming the good points of living urban...at least in less urban places, the storm doesn't put everything at a stand still...everyone in more 'normal' cities and areas, can still get in their own car or truck and move and go as needed to repair things, resupply and yes...get back to work and normal life.
  Seems the urban style, and 99% dependence on mass, underground transportation is proving to be a nagging single point of failure, no?
  This was not that bad of a storm. If it hit NYC and other cities there worse than it should...maybe it should be a wake up call for them...to be better prepared. These storms come in cycles and this is likely going to be more of a routine occurrence in the next decade or so.
  it isn't like anyone will call for us to "move NYC to a safer area" like we've heard when talk of rebuilding flooded and hurricane damaged cities happened in the not so distant past...even on Slashdot.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
9. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by bws111 · 2012-10-30 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  38 dead from the storm, not total.
10. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by bws111 · 2012-10-30 08:03 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  "Be better prepared" - than what? The storm surge that flooded lower Manhattan beat the previous record by 2 feet, and that record was set almost 200 years ago. The fact that there were only 38 people killed in the entire region shows just how well prepared they were. Nobody was drowned in the subways, because they stopped the subways before they got flooded. Nobody was stuck in elevators, because they turned off the elevators before the power was shut down.
  What is it with all these people saying 'it was not that bad a storm'. It was that bad a storm for the area. It was record flooding. From what I understand, Category 5 hurricanes are 'not that bad a storm' compared to the storms on Jupiter - pretty meaningless comparison, isn't it?
11. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:32 · Score: 0
  
  Nobody was drowned in the subways, because they stopped the subways before they got flooded. Nobody was stuck in elevators, because they turned off the elevators before the power was shut down.
  You sound pretty sure. Nobody swept the subways, they just shut off the trains. Homeless that live down there most certainly died, likely after wondering why the trains weren't running, and since no one will miss them, their numbers will never be counted.
12. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by nehumanuscrede · 2012-10-30 09:10 · Score: 2
  
  If the media didn't portray this as the " END OF TEH WORLD ! " then I may pay more attention to it.
  
  The bottom line is, while tragic, the damage is pretty much what is expected from a Category One Storm. Could have been a lot worse. There are four more categories of stronger storms to contend with . . .
  
  Lots of rain, storm surge, high winds for a while, fire, flooding, no power for several days to months ( YES months. Some places here after IKE had no power for MONTHS ), the usual. At least it didn't spawn a dozen tornadoes over the city for you. Nothing like dealing with a hurricane AND the friggin tornadoes they usually spawn on top of it all. ( Hurricane Alicia - 1983 I think it was )
  
  Lots of lessons are going to be learned. ( Like not putting emergency generators and / or their fuel tanks in the basements. Realizing your home insurance doesn't include Flood insurance. Etc. )
  
  The only folks that are shocked at the damage are those that have never been through this. They may have seen it on TV in past years when Florida, Texas or Louisiana got hammered by similar storms and didn't think that much of it. Now, at least, this regions generation has a healthy respect for what a hurricane is capable of. If another one comes along, they'll be much better prepared to deal with it.
13. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by YrWrstNtmr · 2012-10-30 09:20 · Score: 2
  
  The Navy did the same with ships from Norfolk. It is far safer to be out at sea than tied up dockside.
  Unless you misjudge the size, speed and track of the storm. Now add in a generator that craps out, and cannot pump out the bilge anymore.
  
  When they left port, the projected storm track was much different than what actually happened.
14. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by AuMatar · 2012-10-30 09:27 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The navy has much bigger, more modern ships. There's also national security risks if the navy boats are damaged. No such problems for a movie prop.
  And like I said- it may be safer for the boat. It isn't safer for the crew. This wasn't a surprise storm, this had been forecast for a week. Tie up the boat, stay in a hotel (preferably about 100 miles or so inland), and then repair the boat as needed. The health and safety of the crew is far more important than the ship. The owners deserve to be sued into oblivion for even asking. It is NOT acceptable to risk 16 lives to save money on repairs. Hell, take it to a dry dock if you're that scared.
  
  --
  I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
15. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by swanzilla · 2012-10-30 09:31 · Score: 1
  
  One dead; one missing. Never forget.
  
  --
  0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
16. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by AuMatar · 2012-10-30 10:22 · Score: 2
  
  1 dead, 1 missing, and 13 came damn close and needed rescue choppers during a hurricane, endangering both themselves and the people who had to save them. Its inexcusable and criminally negligent. It probably doesn't deserve quite the amount of media attention its getting, but it was amazingly stupid.
  
  --
  I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
17. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by hguorbray · 2012-10-30 10:29 · Score: 2
  
  It took off a 1000sq ft section of roof in our Seacaucus Data Center and let the rain in -and the magic smoke out....
  
  will be several days to recover, but we have other Data Centers in Mass, NY and Atlanta and Denver which can still cover that half of the country....
  
  -I'm just sayin'
18. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Seeteufel · 2012-10-30 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  Marriage? That was a sign from god!
19. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Seeteufel · 2012-10-30 14:49 · Score: 1
  
  Within the next 80 years 7 billion deaths are expected.
20. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by chrismcb · 2012-10-30 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  They were idiots for going out to sea.
  
  Are you saying every boat that goes out to sea is an idiot? They didn't go out to sea to get away from the storm, the were already out to sea. They were travelling from one side of the country to the other. Apparently they decided to go around the storm, when they had equipment malfunctions.
  They didn't jump in their boat, and say "we'll be safer at sea"
21. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 05:04 · Score: 0
  
  I hope everyone had flood insurance, it is dirt cheap.
  Dirt cheap, unless you're in a flood plain ... then it's very expensive.
22. Re:No big deal. It was a cat1 storm by painandgreed · 2012-10-31 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  They were idiots for going out to sea. Even if it was marginally safer for the boat to be at sea than in port for the storm, it was safer for the crew to be in port, or in hotel rooms 100 miles inland. Those people died due to a combination of greedy ownership that valued the ship more than the crew's safety and their own stupidity in not refusing. All this for a reproduction used in movie shoots. A senseless waste.
  With an attitude like that, you'd never have any crab or probably fish for that matter. Some jobs are simply more dangerous than others, and sailing even in good weather is one of those. I suspect they knew what they were getting into way before they were even hired, let alone asked to sail out. They left with plenty of time and when the forecasts painted a much more favorable situation. For that matter, I know some sailors on tall ships here on the West coast, and if you think you could have kept them from sailing out n their ship, you don't know sailors. Pretty sure, if given the chance to do it again knowing what they know now, they'd still take the ship out, just with a backup generator.
Hard to feel sorry for NYC by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:21 · Score: 0

The city's collective-arrogance towards the rest of the world makes it really tough to pity the celebrities, financial crooks, government-thugs, hipsters and other undesirables.
The best thing we can hope for is maybe Anderson Cooper will wash away.
1. Re:Hard to feel sorry for NYC by sethmeisterg · 2012-10-30 07:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because only crooks and scumbags live in New York City. You, sir, are a putz.
2. Re:Hard to feel sorry for NYC by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  But imagine the pride they will feel when the flood water recedes their city will be clean for a day.
No remote backup for Gawker? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:22 · Score: 0

Not a sysadmin myself, but isn't it poor planning to not have your sites mirrored in a remote location for disaster recovery in situations like this?
1. Re:No remote backup for Gawker? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: 0
  
  This is Gawker we're talking about. They're good at one thing-- being a bunch of whiny bitches.
Oblig. XKCD by IamLarryboy · 2012-10-30 07:23 · Score: -1

Oblig XKCD:
http://www.xkcd.com/
1. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Revotron · 2012-10-30 07:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I don't think you're doing that right.
2. Re:Oblig. XKCD by IamLarryboy · 2012-10-30 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  I don't think you got the joke.
  ****
  Service Temporarily Unavailable
  The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
  Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu) Server at xkcd.com Port 80
  ****
3. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Revotron · 2012-10-30 08:01 · Score: 2
  
  Huh. Works for me.
4. Re:Oblig. XKCD by gman003 · 2012-10-30 08:13 · Score: 2
  
  Weird, it works just fine for me.
5. Re:Oblig. XKCD by oodaloop · 2012-10-30 08:23 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Reminds me of one of xkcd's funniest comics:
  
  http://xkcd.com/404/
  
  --
  Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by CajunArson · 2012-10-30 07:24 · Score: 3, Funny

I was promised a NUKULAR OPOCALIPSE yesterday, and here we are with satellite images that don't even show the entire East Coast as a glowing radioactive wasteland.
I think that this complete lack of NUKULAR meltdown is 100% absolute irrefutable proof of two key concepts:
1. Capitalism is an abject failure and we need U.N. control of everything and everyone right now.
2. NUKULAR power is obviously far too dangerous and should be banned right now before somebody doesn't get killed again JUST LIKE FUKUSHIMA.

--
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
1. Re:WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:36 · Score: 0
  
  I was promised a NUKULAR OPOCALIPSE yesterday, and here we are with satellite images that don't even show the entire East Coast as a glowing radioactive wasteland.
  I think that this complete lack of NUKULAR meltdown is 100% absolute irrefutable proof of two key concepts:
  1. Capitalism is an abject failure and we need U.N. control of everything and everyone right now.
  2. NUKULAR power is obviously far too dangerous and should be banned right now before somebody doesn't get killed again JUST LIKE FUKUSHIMA.
  As long as we're developing a manifesto, I'd like to add:
  3. For the safety of the children only corporate persons can own information, natural persons must lease it.
2. Re:WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:54 · Score: 0
  
  I was promised a NUKULAR OPOCALIPSE yesterday, and here we are with satellite images that don't even show the entire East Coast as a glowing radioactive wasteland.
  Didn't you mean a NUKULAR OBAMACLIPSEE?
3. Re:WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by AmiMoJo · 2012-10-31 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  I'd also like to add that somehow Japan got through the summer peak demand without blackouts, despite only having three active reactors for the entire country. What happened to rolling blackouts and economic ruin that were predicted?
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
4. Re:WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by sloth+jr · 2012-10-31 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  I dunno; the summary is patently wrong: three nukes DID shutdown because of Sandy. Salem-1 remains shutdown because of failure of 4 of 6 coolant pumps. Efforts to repair those 4 continue today. From the comments below, it seems as though *5* of 6 pumps were actually adversely affected. So yay, the system SCRAM'ed and the massive redundancy built into nukes kept this from turning into an incident... but closer than I would have preferred.
  
  http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/ElectricPower/8872230
  
  From the cited article:
  "Salem-1 shut early Tuesday morning "when four of the station's six circulating water pumps were no longer available due to weather impacts from Hurricane Sandy," the company said in a statement that day.
  
  Waves hit the plant's circulating water building, requiring the shutdown, PSEG Nuclear chairman and CEO Ralph Izzo said during a press teleconference Wednesday morning. One of five pumps has been repaired, and the other four are expected to be repaired Wednesday, Izzo said. He did not say when Salem-1 is expected to return to service."
5. Re:WHERE ARE THE MELTDOWNS!!?!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 08:14 · Score: 0
  
  I'd also like to add that somehow Japan got through the summer peak demand without blackouts, despite only having three active reactors for the entire country. What happened to rolling blackouts and economic ruin that were predicted?
  1) None of that was said the way you report it.
  2) Fukushima had 6 reactors onsite, but that was not the only plant in the nation.
  3) They decreased energy consumption as a nation, less AC, lower industry output (220K fewer cars the month after, for example)
  For anyone looking for a fluff piece on the latter, see here:
  http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/03/a-year-after-japans-quake-nissan-thrives/1
Thank God one of the candidates wants to off FEMA by fredrated · 2012-10-30 07:24 · Score: -1, Troll

Then everybody can swim for themselves.
Glub glub glub by Pathogen+David · 2012-10-30 07:25 · Score: 1

I thought it was standard procedure to teach servers to swim these days.
Disaster Plan Fail by OverlordQ · 2012-10-30 07:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

[...] work hard to assess the situation and our recovery plans.
How about not putting mission critical equipment susceptible to water damage in the one place all water will go.

--
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
1. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by Tackhead · 2012-10-30 08:21 · Score: 0
  
  How about not putting mission critical equipment susceptible to water damage in the one place all water will go.
  Well, if you'd prefer to relocate the big, heavy generator, weighing hundreds of tons, and its associated fuel tanks, to the top of a skyscraper, or even two-thirds of the way up, be my guest.
  I mean, it's not like the introduction of thousands of gallons of flammable liquid, capable of producing a fire intense enough to overwhelm any practical fire suppression system, in a location where fire trucks can't possibly reach, has ever caused significant structural damage to buildings in NYC before...
2. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think he was talking about the generator, or the fuel, rather the mission critical systems that rely on said generator and fuel.
  If we learned anything from Fukushima, it was that you can never underestimate mankind's propensity to give mother nature the finger and then act suprised when she breaks it off and shoves it up our collective asses.
3. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by mrdogi · 2012-10-30 09:04 · Score: 2
  
  Information Technology is not important enough in the eyes of so many higher-ups. Until an unrelated complete campus power outage, our primary data center was situated immediately under the Men's restroom, complete with leaky pipes.
  I'll just let that image soak in for a while...
4. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by Bing+Tsher+E · 2012-10-30 12:05 · Score: 1
  
  Two floors up would have sufficed. No reason to put it way up high.
5. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by sumdumass · 2012-10-30 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  You wouldn't need to put the fuel up there. They originally pump it out of the ground over much deeper distances then most skyscrapers would dream of being tall. Pump it up to the generator, have a containment pad or tank, if a fire breaks out, dump the fuel in the line down to the containment vessel.
  Or better yet, don't bother putting either on the roof and just make the room housing it in the basement waterproof. then you can lock down the lower level when there is expected trouble like this and not worry about it.
6. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by snspdaarf · 2012-10-30 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  Data center under the men's room? Piss on that!
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
7. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 14:49 · Score: 0
  
  waterproofing something that requires extensive cooling is non-trivial
8. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by OverlordQ · 2012-10-30 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  Well, if you'd prefer to relocate the big, heavy generator, weighing hundreds of tons, and its associated fuel tanks, to the top of a skyscraper, or even two-thirds of the way up, be my guest.
  
  It wasn't the generators that failed, it was the fuel pumps to the generators that failed. The pumps were in the basement. The generators were on ground floor.
  
  --
  Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
9. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by sumdumass · 2012-10-30 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  It's not impossible either. Look a ships or submarines. You do not need to completely enclose the generators, just keep the below any realistic waterline areas sealed up until above the expected waterline.
10. Re:Disaster Plan Fail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 03:02 · Score: 0
  
  You wouldn't need to put the fuel up there. They originally pump it out of the ground over much deeper distances then most skyscrapers would dream of being tall. Pump it up to the generator, have a containment pad or tank, if a fire breaks out, dump the fuel in the line down to the containment vessel.
  My company has servers at 70 Broad, and that's exactly what they did. The generators are on the 18th floor, with (relatively) small fuel tanks--enough to keep them running for 24 hours, or so. The big tanks are in the basement, along with the pumps to refill the upper tanks. Works great until the basement floods with salt water and the pumps fry.
  As a side note, I'm not sure which one (I think we have 3 facilities in the NYC/Jersey City area), but apparently there was a shark in the lobby. No laser on its head, though.
Face palm by wcrowe · 2012-10-30 07:30 · Score: 1

It's like the old joke about trailer parks attracting tornadoes. There seems to be some sort of physical law that says that if a data center is going to be set up, it will be in a basement, and in a low-lying area.

--
Proverbs 21:19
1. Re:Face palm by Bing+Tsher+E · 2012-10-30 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  The truth is that trailer parks are often located on crappy vacant land. I.e. land prone to flooding or wind damage that nobody with any sense would build anything valuable on. So some cheap trailer park developer buys it and rents out cheap lots.
I'm waiting for the calls... by cayenne8 · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm waiting for people to start asking the questions of "Should we bother rebuilding in New Orle...err...New York, since they're built so close the water, and are a disaster waiting to happen?"
"What were they thinking building a city between two bodies of water near the ocean so close to sea level"?
"Maybe we should just move the city to further inland, where its safer and we won't have to go through this over and over again...and keep wasting money"
I know I've heard that before..hmmmm.
Seems like the should have known not to build so close to the water, and if they did...not to put things that react badly with salt water underground, eh?
Sorry if it sounds like sour grapes...and I do feel horrible for the people that flooded and lost things, I know first hand how that feels from Katrina.
But I do get a bit uneasy..seeing how differently things are treated during the storms and afterwards....depending on where in the US you are situated.
I mean, this storm, while large in breadth....was a weak Cat. 1 when it made landfall. I could see it being worse, if it had happened and turned into a blizzard over NJ and NYC as was a worst case scenario.
But c'mon...if you have property ON the freakin shoreline, beach front houses, guess what...you're gonna get damaged with a hurricane or other strong storm.
Aside from the areas right near the water..I didn't see all that much damage. Sure, people are going to be without power a couple or more weeks in some areas. Those of us that live in the Gulf south take this as normal a couple times a year...that's what you get for living close to the ocean.
Again....not to make light of anyone's loss, flooding is very difficult to deal with...it sucks.
But this was a weak storm, and did about normal damage as happens to places with a storm like this hitting a coastal area.
I feel bad for those that will next have to deal with FEMA.....then again, maybe their a bit better by now...but I still have less than fond memories for them.
Anyway...people in those areas up there....you'd better get used to these storms hitting more often.
These things go in cycles..and ya'll have been lucky the past decades. I believe back in the 50's a number of storms made landfall up there...but has been so long, that people forget.
Last year, Irene and this year Sandy....hope you're better prepared for next year....if nothing else, you're a dolt if you don't purchase flood insurance. It is DIRT cheap....most everyone would be well served buying it if you ever have even occasional flash floods in your area....

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
1. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  lol butthurt much?
2. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by SuperMooCow · 2012-10-30 08:07 · Score: 2
  
  AFAIK New York is not below sea level.
3. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by DerekLyons · 2012-10-30 08:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  But this was a weak storm, and did about normal damage as happens to places with a storm like this hitting a coastal area.
  I don't know where you live - but here on Planet Earth, nobody rational calls a storm with 100mph winds and an 11 foot storm surge, "weak". Not to mention, this storm was considerably more severe than is "normal" for that area.
  
  Sorry if it sounds like sour grapes...
  No, you don't sound like sour grapes - you sound like an ignorant jackass.
  
  Catch a clue.
4. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by GNious · 2012-10-30 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  New York subway is, at least partially ... I wonder what that is looking like these days...
5. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by cayenne8 · 2012-10-30 08:38 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know where you live - but here on Planet Earth, nobody rational calls a storm with 100mph winds and an 11 foot storm surge, "weak". Not to mention, this storm was considerably more severe than is "normal" for that area.
  I heard 90MPH gusts...and most of those readings were higher off than ground level....which when you get to the 20th floor of a building..the winds are MUCH higher than on the ground.
  Aside from some high gusts..sustained winds from what I saw last night....were only in the 50-60 mph range.
  I saw reporters out on the streets whose windbreakers apparently had no wind to break.
  As for where I live...I live in the New Orleans area...I've been through more than my share of storms on the level of intensity that NYC got, and I do know what they are like.
  Sure it causes damage....but it isn't that bad. The sustained winds weren't that bad, it didn't stay and dump a horrible amount of rain (I've seen a foot of water in a hour, I don't think they get that much did they?).
  And...like I mentioned, that area better get used to these storms happening more regularly. They've gotten lulled into complacency due to the cycle being in the low side, but it appears that it is about to start kicking up again. Decades ago, that area did get landfall storms like this with more regularity. NYC has a doomsday scenario, just like NOLA does...it didn't happen last night, but it could.
  People need to understand that and prepare for that. And realize...this wasn't THAT bad of a storm.
  11 ft is a good storm surge...but not catastrophic, and not unheard of for a weak Cat 1 storm.
  At least you didn't beat the recent record of 27.8 ft and have a whole city pretty much removed from the map.
  Again...these things come in cycles...that area had better start preparing for a "new" normal.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
6. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by cayenne8 · 2012-10-30 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  AFAIK New York is not below sea level.
  No, but some areas are not very much higher than sea level, and combine that with being surrounded by water (Hudson River, etc) and exposed readily to coastal storms on the Atlantic...you're just asking for things like this to happen.
  It isn't like this area has never been hit by a big storm...its just they've been lucky the past few decades, but these type of things cycle.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
7. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Synerg1y · 2012-10-30 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Hurricanes in NYC are very very rare regardless of time period. A lot of places build to withstand weather like this, there's actual building codes builders have to follow when building on the shore line of an area known to experience this kind of weather, this is why cities in the south east don't come crumbling down at the first gust from a hurricane. New York has a lot of old infrastructure, so it's not one of those. Insurance should cover a lot of the damage, but then they're just going to turn around and ask the government / taxpayers for money. I wonder though, because most of NYC's infrastructure is made of stone & concrete, how bad can the flooding damage actually be?
8. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by bws111 · 2012-10-30 09:12 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Getting several feet of snow in one day is not all that unusual in Buffalo. What do you think would happen to New Orleans if that happened there? An average cold winter's day where I live has a low temp of about 0F. Think New Orleans could take that for a few weeks at a time? The tidal change in the Bay of Fundy is something like 40ft - think New Orleans could take it? Sure, you get winds over 100MPH in New Orleans, but Mt Washington, NH recorded over 230MPH. Think you could take it?
  Comparing things like wind speed and storm surge and temperature between different regions is a fools game. What really matters is deviation from normal, and this was a very large deviation from normal. Yes, the storm surge was 'only' 13 feet, but the last time it was that high in NY was - unknown. The previous recorded max was in 1830 something, and this beat it. No, 70MPH winds are not that high in absolute terms, but tell that to the trees that couldn't take it (because normally they are only subjected to 50MPH winds).
  In short, get over yourself. The fact that you have experienced similar absolute numbers without devastation does not in any way mean that the same conditions are not devastating elsewhere, or that they shouldn't be devastating. No matter where you live, someone else is living with conditions that you would consider devastating.
9. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by PlusFiveTroll · 2012-10-30 09:17 · Score: 2
  
  You only consider it a weak storm (in your previous post) because of the failures of our current hurricane classification system.
  Sandy was a category 1 wind event, as proclaimed, but that wind event area was huge, possibly one of the largest hurricane wind events in the Atlantic ocean, which leads too...
  Sandy was at least a category 2 surge event, if not category 3. The direction of the storm, the storms gigantic wind field, and astronomical high tide lead to a surge event far more dangerous then the current system would lead a person to believe. The damage you are seeing near the shore is a testament to that. The failure to for emergency planners to take that in consideration lead people to use shelters that were then flooded.
  As to get people to build away from the ocean, yes it's a damn smart idea, but people seem to follow passions better then good ideas. People have a relationship with the ocean, they love its beauty and power, and when it's going good, it is great. Since the time between major events with the ocean is pretty long, we think we can build up our walls and get the most of the relationship, and that maybe we'll never have to pay the piper.
10. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by couchslug · 2012-10-30 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  New York is valuable, and has the resources to promptly recover.
  Those who thought putting data centers in BASEMENTS asked for what they got. A broken water main (common enough) could have fucked them just as hard.
  In NOLA, only the container port is necessary, while slums BELOW, repeat BELOW, repeat REQUIRE LEVEE PROTECTION because they are BELOW sea level (NYC is NOT below seal level) are not.
  The __founders__ of NOLA didn't build below sea level, which is why the French Quarter wasn't destroyed by Katrina.
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
11. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:46 · Score: 0
  
  This is a category 5 reductio absurdum event.
12. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by budgenator · 2012-10-30 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  Considering a ass whipping GWB took over Katrina, the number of well-heeled liberal Democrats in the Empire State and the proximity to the elections I doubt that there will be any problems with FEMA. Obama is probably happier than a slinky on an escalator that there is something to distract people from the Bengazi debacle. I know as far as hurricanes go Sara is much as far as intensity goes, but she's a big sucker, we've had Gale and near gale wind in Michigan for a couple days now.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
13. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by charlievarrick · 2012-10-30 10:18 · Score: 1
  
  WRT Datagram, the data center isn't in the basement, the generator is.
14. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by DerekLyons · 2012-10-30 10:27 · Score: 1
  
  .I've been through more than my share of storms on the level of intensity that NYC got, and I do know what they are like.
  That means you know New Orleans - and you aptly demonstrate you know fuck all about New York. Monday's storm was well above the norm the New York. That's a stone cold "sure as the sun rises in the East" level fact.
  
  And...like I mentioned, that area better get used to these storms happening more regularly.
  In a universe where these things run in cycles, you'd have a point. We don't live in such a universe.
  
  Again
  You're a clueless dolt who needs to get the fuck over himself.
15. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by watice · 2012-10-30 10:40 · Score: 2
  
  The infrastructure can withstand most natural disasters (and as you mentioned, time) because most of it is built from stone, concrete, & steel, as opposed to wood. This is fine for winds, hurricanes, even amateur terrorist attempts. However, most of the flooding damage happened not because of the rain downfall which was actually pretty little, but because of the surges happening in the coastal areas. A lot of the infrastructure also have below ground dwellings, cellars, and basements. The building codes are pretty strict here, I just got fined myself recently and those fines are anything but cheap. While it's true that structures built before 1968 do have a different set of codes to follow, our Dept. of Buildings keeps databases of every single structure, building, or residence, inspection dates, permits, etc. Coincidentally, I just saw city council speaker Quinn on TV promising to help residents expediate the permit process for residents with damage. Every single change to your residence needs an architect to file for permits. Had I known that, I wouldn't be paying thousands in fines.
16. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 11:19 · Score: 0
  
  Holy shit, You make friends really easily.... I can tell!
  *cough*rudeasfuckjackass*cough*
17. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Sketchly · 2012-10-30 11:24 · Score: 1
  
  It is now :)
18. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 12:10 · Score: -1
  
  People in New Jersey and New York will not be treated like the people in New Orleans and the Missippi Coast. Part of it is that we have a decent president. Right wingers like Bush saw New Orleans as a place loaded with blacks, musicians, and creoles and really do not consider such folk as being humans. Obviously the economic harm done to the NE is a shame just as it was a shame when the economy of New Orleans was destroyed not to mention that more lives were lost in New Orleans and surrounding areas tan on 9/11 in New York.
  So after the misery is abated a bit maybe we can point a harsh finger at those who deny global warming and insist that concrete jungles, dense housing and high rise nightmares are all fine and dandy. New York and other major cities have created a monster that they can not maintain.
  Being a long time Florida resident it is hard to believe that building codes allow construction that comes unglued in mild winds. All too often i have been in 150 mph. winds with gusts and micro cells blowing much harder and my neighbors and I were all fine. I can somewhat understand the water issues but wind damage in a mild storm is not acceptable.
19. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by RabidReindeer · 2012-10-30 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  "What were they thinking building a city between two bodies of water near the ocean so close to sea level"?
  That it would be a hell of a good seaport?
20. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-10-30 12:41 · Score: 2
  
  If that happened to New Orleans, the Buffalonians would be laughing their asses off at the hicks from the sticks who don't know basic life skills like driving on ice. Seen it before. There would also be racist and classist comments.
  A lot of butthurt in this thread - maybe for once the shoe's on the other foot and the laughers are getting a dose of their own medicine.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
21. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 12:55 · Score: 0
  
  "butthurt" gets a positive score? Does no one remember that victims of Katrina were left to fend for themselves and DIE for a week before the federal government even took notice?
22. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Seeteufel · 2012-10-30 14:44 · Score: 1
  
  The damage is done to the foundations of the building and the electric appliances. I was told the construction sites of WTC got heavily damaged. Of course you can't have salt water in the foundations.
  Do you believe the stories from the nuclear power plants? http://www.nei.org/newsandevents/newsreleases/nuclear-energy-facilities-prove-resilience-during-hurricane-sandy/
  New York: Indian Point 2—continued operating at 100 percent power Indian Point 3—manual safe shut down from 100 percent power on Oct. 30 due to an electric grid disruption Ginna—shut down for refueling outage Fitzpatrick—continued operating at 100 percent power Nine Mile Point 1—manual safe shut down from 100 percent power on Oct. 29 due to an electric grid disruption Nine Mile Point 2—continued operating at 100 percent power.
23. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Seeteufel · 2012-10-30 14:46 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly, it survives the impact but the damage to the building is done.
24. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by TapeCutter · 2012-10-30 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  From where I stand (10,000 miles away), it doesn't look like a government vendetta against the south, it appears to me that both sides of politics are falling all over themselves to make sure a repeat of the Katrina response does not happen AGAIN. This temporary bipartisan approach is a good for the USA's political soul, especially so close to an election when you would expect them to be trying to heap balme on the opposition. It's a clear acknowlegement that the people affected by Katrina (such as yourself) received shoddy support from their negligent governments, both state and fedral. At the very minimum those people owe you a heart felt apology, a government that fails it's people in their hour of need and cannot admit it's mistakes, will not change.
  
  Also the cost of flood insurance depends on the exact location of your property, insurance companies are not known for their charitable works, I doubt it's affordable for those living below sea level even if the levy banks were maintained properly. As for your theory about cycles, there is a whole branch of science dedicated to them, it's called 'climate science' and the 'cycles' are changing. Insurance companies have been addding the projected costs of these changing "cycles" to your premiums for at least a decade now, the agricultural sector, coastal and other low lying properties have born the brunt of those increased costs since (statistically speaking) they are the ones most at risk from rising sea levels and the extremes of drought and flooding. Even if we stopped fucking with the climate tomorow, due to a natural phenomena called "thermal inertia", it's only going to get worse in the first half of this century. But that's not the real problem, the real problem is that like religion and politics, climate science is no longer discussed in polite company, and in my experience the 'average american' is suprisingly polite in face to face converstations.
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
25. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by tlambert · 2012-10-30 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  As for where I live...I live in the New Orleans area...I've been through more than my share of storms on the level of intensity that NYC got, and I do know what they are like.
  I'm pretty sure the New Orleans area building codes are not up to snuff for a Loma Prieta level earth quake.
  It's similarly unfair to expect the NYC codes to be up to snuff for a Sandy-like storm (although I'd expect them to be a lot closer than they were, given the 20 and 50 year storm history for the area, as you implied, I wouldn't expect them to be quite there still).
  Of course, the codes were not up to snuff in New Orleans for Katrina, but it was a worse disaster than it should have been, given that the levee (redesigned) levee system was started in 1965 and was supposed to have been completed in 1978/1979 - 25 years before Katrina hit.
  Government Accounting Office report of Katrina: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d051050t.pdf
  PS: A lot of the levee delays were environmentalist opposition, legal opposition, local populace opposition, and local government failures to maintain the parts of the system that had already been handed off from the corps of engineers to local authorities.
26. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by volxdragon · 2012-10-31 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  One could argue they learned their lesson from Katrina....then again one could also argue that last time we have a (R) in office and this time we have a (D). I think both arguments might be at least partially true...
27. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by cayenne8 · 2012-10-31 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  As someone else pointed out, much of my post...was to illustrate the difference in perception and attitude of those in the US...when a storm like this hits.
  There was a LOT of derision, and a a lot of people saying "we shouldn't rebuild New Orleans"...etc.
  Much of my post was to point out these attitudes in the past...and how much it can hurt when it happens to *you*....in the NE of the US.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
28. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Rich0 · 2012-10-31 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I'm all for questioning the rebuilding of New Orleans - it is in a major hurricane zone and substantially below sea level.
  NYC only rarely gets these problems and is at least above sea level to start, but I do think it would be wiser to not stick critical infrastructure underground even so. It is a really lousy place for the financial hub of the world. There is no reason that the servers can't be up in a mountain somewhere.
  Oh, and in any case where there needs to be relocation I'm fine with reimbursement to property owners for the value of the land, and relocation funding to anybody impacted (landowner or not). It is probably cheaper than doing the rebuilding anyway. To me it isn't about punishing people so much as making better long-term decisions.
29. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Synerg1y · 2012-10-31 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  Proof we build our reactors better than the Japanese :)
30. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by bws111 · 2012-10-31 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  I would like to point out that last year most of the devastation from Irene (and again during the Halloween snowstorm) occurred 'in the mountains somewhere'. And then all the second-guessers were yelling 'why is that critical infrastructure exposed like that - put it underground where it belongs!'
31. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Hylandr · 2012-10-31 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Why does everyone get all butt-hurt when New York's 'Victim Status' is challenged?
  As storms go, it was weak. Barely hurricane force. Category 1.
  Go to New Orleans and try bitching about it.
  - Dan.
  
  --
  ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
32. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by DerekLyons · 2012-10-31 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  Why does everyone get all butt-hurt when New York's 'Victim Status' is challenged?
  The only people getting butt hurt are the ignorant jackasses like yourself.
  
  As storms go, it was weak. Barely hurricane force. Category 1.
  For New England, no it wasn't weak. That's a fact. If you can't deal with facts, go fuck yourself.
33. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Hylandr · 2012-10-31 07:46 · Score: 1
  
  WAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh
  You cry like a New-Yorker.
  Go run from Air Force One again. That was funny.
  - Dan.
  
  --
  ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
34. Re:I'm waiting for the calls... by Seeteufel · 2012-10-31 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  The Fukushima one was an US model, oh, and a twin reactor is found in the nice earthquake zone of California.
re flight cancellations by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:35 · Score: -1

how much of that is real, and how much is financial, as the airlines decided to cancel flights that wern't full of passengers, or decided to cancel flights to NY on the grounds that the planes would fly out half empty, which is a purely economic decision
We should know better after Deep Impact by sethmeisterg · 2012-10-30 07:37 · Score: 1

If that movie taught us one thing, it was to make sure critical infrastructure was in the physical middle of the country, away from the massive tidal waves that would be generated by impacting asteroids.
1. Re:We should know better after Deep Impact by Seeteufel · 2012-10-30 14:54 · Score: 1
  
  You could also have data centers in a Swedish bunker, a Berlin palais or in a Switzerland bank.
Re:Thank God one of the candidates wants to off FE by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:39 · Score: 0

And to think they thought they had any hope.
Nature just shit in his cereal. HARD.
After this huge mess, disbanding it would be horrible.
There'll likely be worse storms around the corner, this winter certainly ain't looking up to be a nice one.
It is more a thought of the fact that it is becoming more unpredictable that is worrying. The climate is chaotic as hell right now.
Who knows what kinds of hell it might be in 5 and then 10 years from now.
Think I might go build a mountain city in Scotland. Yes. Everybody secretly wants to live in a cave anyway. Caves are just awesome.
You don't like caves? Well, you are WRONG.
Callcentric VoIP service also down by Bill+Dimm · 2012-10-30 07:42 · Score: 2

Callcentric apparently had a single datacenter in NYC with no backup power generator. Lots of discussion here.
Re:Thank God one of the candidates wants to off FE by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 07:43 · Score: 0

typo - meant to type EPA
Whee do you think the fiber goes? by SuperKendall · 2012-10-30 07:48 · Score: 1

As I understand it, it's the availability of fiber. DC needs a fuck ton of fiber, and a big city is more likely to have it already present then some podunk town.
Did you realize that fiber connects things? And as a result there is a "fuck-ton" of fiber not just in a big city but anywhere the major fiber trunks go, which is all across the country?
What did you think all that traffic did when it left the city? Get printed out and put on a Greyhound?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Whee do you think the fiber goes? by firex726 · 2012-10-30 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because a single fiber cable in some backwater town with zero redundancy is a great place to build a DC.
2. Re:Whee do you think the fiber goes? by deathlyslow · 2012-10-30 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Wow that is a gross over dramatization. No provider in their right mind would string one run of fiber when they were doing it, even if it was a backwater town. Having lived in a "back water town" for a few years, the local providers install way more than is needed to allow for the forced sharing of their network.
  
  --
  Don't blame me for redundant posts. I can't type very fast. Hence the user ID.
Fukushima and Sandy show by circletimessquare · 2012-10-30 07:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

that flooding ruins backup generators, pumps, fuel storage. I hope that disaster mitigation plans are reviewed.
I also hate people who judge negatively from hindsight, but disaster planning is about considering the most probable of the improbable. Flooding looms most threatening and probable of the improbable.
Perhaps putting all the backup infrastructure on a higher floor makes it harder to maintain, access, and/ or protect from mischief/ terrorism. However plain old flooding seems to be an issue time and time again in disaster scenarios and really needs highest priority in disaster plans.

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
1. Re:Fukushima and Sandy show by JazzHarper · 2012-10-30 10:12 · Score: 2
  
  Eleven years ago, flooding from Tropical Storm Allison knocked out generators in the Texas Medical Center in Houston, the largest medical center in the world. Disaster planners should, by now, be well acquainted with the threat of flooding to their backup power. In any case, you are correct that they do not always have the flexibility to install such machinery on floors above ground level. The best that can be done, in many cases, is retrofit the generator rooms with seals and ventilation that can withstand outside flooding--to a certain level. Part of disaster planning involves finding the point at which the cost of insuring against a low-probability, high-impact event exceeds the risk-weighted cost of the event, and stopping short of that.
2. Re:Fukushima and Sandy show by snspdaarf · 2012-10-30 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  And Ike did the same to UTMB. I believe part of the problem is that the people that control the money look at backup systems as something that is already costly, and they don't want to spend any more than they have to on them. They can't not have them if they want to be taken seriously, but they don't want to spend anything they don't have to on systems that, if all goes well, will never be used. Myopic, yes, but that's how a lot of management people think.
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
here is the easiest compromise: by circletimessquare · 2012-10-30 07:57 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan,_Kansas

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
1. Re:here is the easiest compromise: by bev_tech_rob · 2012-10-30 10:03 · Score: 1
  
  Yea, but those pesky EF4 & 5 twisters tend to make a mess of things quite frequently......unless they are underground....
  
  --
  You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
I think the most important part about all of this. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:01 · Score: 0

Is that president Obama declared the situation a disaster area.
Thank you captain obvious.
Is that all? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:06 · Score: 0, Insightful

Eh, religion probbably killed more than 38 yesterday
1. Re:Is that all? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 10:07 · Score: 0
  
  Religious people who help the world's needy probably saved more than 38,000 yesterday.
  There, FTFY.
'Wall Street' data center by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:07 · Score: 0

Remember the data center in the movie "Wall Street"? That was the real life data center of Telerate Systems -- on the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center.
They never did get flooded.
1. Re:'Wall Street' data center by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, but there was that other thing, with the airplane...
Lots of redundancy by SuperKendall · 2012-10-30 08:13 · Score: 2

Yes, because a single fiber cable in some backwater town with zero redundancy
Why do you think there is zero redundancy?
Even if you had only one carrier in a town that had a fiber run go through (very unlikely), if the cable gets cut on one side of town the fiber provider can just run all the traffic around the nationwide loop the other way until it gets where it needs to go - and believe me a cut will be fixed VERY quickly.
A town where "a single fiber" dead ends is obviously not a good location, but there are many towns across the U.S. with bundles of fiber going through.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Generator underneath Grand Central... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:42 · Score: 0

What happened to the generator underneath Grand Central that the Alphas could not even stop?
Re:I think the most important part about all of th by gmuslera · 2012-10-30 08:52 · Score: 1

The war of the previous ones that attacked New York gave Bush another mandate. Now Obama to get reelected must declare war on weather, explain that they have weapons of mass destruction, and nuke clouds, that will teach them who they are dealing with.
if Pat Roberson can do it, so can I: by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 08:54 · Score: 0

Sandy's wrath of ghod on the banksters.

Notice it didn't hit when OWS was in town.
First Tampa, now this. Oh the inhumanity!
Bloomberg Is The Biggie by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 09:47 · Score: 0

The biggest data center in the path of Sandy was Bloomberg's huge mile-long data center at Washington Street And Houston, Right next to the Hudson River!
When I worked for Bloomberg, we took a tour through that data center. It was not on the ground floor but it would be seriously suffering for power and how were those Bloomberg Terminal signals supposed to get out of that island called Manhattan.
But Bloomberg will keep it secret if anything happens. If he can.
From my VPS provider by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 10:35 · Score: 3, Informative

All Linux VPS located in New York City, NY VPS are currently offline. They are located in Internap's LGA6 facility in 111 8th Avenue.
Please be advised that Internap's LGA11 facility is experiencing significant flooding in the sub-basement of the 75 Broad Street building as a result of Hurricane Sandy. The flooding has submerged and destroyed the site's diesel pumps and is preventing fuel from being pumped to the generators on the mezzanine level.
Thankfully, our NYC server nodes are not directly located in LGA11's facility, but rather LGA6. The cause of this temporary outage is that LGA6 routes certain parts of the network's backbones through LGA11 which is currently offline as explained above. URPad's downtown NYC facility, located at 111 8th Avenue, is currently experiencing a network-only outage. The datacenter is not located in the storm surge zone, and is not suffering from any flooding. All URPad hardware and assets are safe and remain powered on. Engineers are aware of the network outage and all efforts will be made to restore network connectivity as soon as possible.
Internap & URPad will continue to work hard to assess the situation and our recovery plans, and will communicate those plans as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience and understanding during this crisis. Please trust that we are doing everything we can to bring your services back online as soon as possible.
1. Re:From my VPS provider by cinnamon+colbert · 2012-10-30 11:34 · Score: 2
  
  This reminds me of a story from www.thedailywtf.com New hire is shown the server room: redundant hardened servers, redundant RAID drives, redundant airconditioners, power supplies, phone lines to call people... Comes in a few weeks later, power went out, no airconditioning, servers are toast. why no phone call to the large number of people supposed ot get called ? no redundant power on the phones....... I mean, what kind of a moron has backup diesel in the BASEMENT !!!! ON AN ISLAND !!! Ok, no one thinks of everything. acid test, do they move the generators to high ground.....
So it's impossible for a nuclear meltdown to happe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 10:44 · Score: 0

So it's impossible for a nuclear meltdown to happen?
Because unless it isn't, then your rant was unfounded (as unfounded as what you think the warnings were about).
how many days have to go by by cinnamon+colbert · 2012-10-30 11:28 · Score: 2

before we can tell all those people along the jersey and CT shores, ya wanna live on the ocean, get your own darn flood insurance, we the taxpayers are tired of picking up the tab so you can have a great view ?
1. Re:how many days have to go by by falcon5768 · 2012-11-12 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  NJ CT and NY all pay more money to the US Government that they receive back, so the reality is, they are paying not only for those great views, but making sure the other states don't get sucked up in a tornado or break of the western seaboard in an earthquake too. You owe them, they don't owe you.
  
  --
  "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Define irony... by TapeCutter · 2012-10-30 13:37 · Score: 1

This is a category 5 reductio absurdum event.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Too much trust by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 15:35 · Score: 0

"Nuclear Energy Institute was quick to point out that all 34 nuclear facilities in Sandy's path made it through without problems."
I by that for a dollar!!!!!!
This is a problem? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-30 15:53 · Score: 0

"The NY Times has a running list of Sandy-related problems, including ... official disaster declarations from President Obama"
Ooookay.
Data Centers by profiteer1 · 2012-10-30 18:31 · Score: 1

They better have made copies of the servers in case of flooding. Million dollar HFT algos and matching algorithms are in those servers. Here is the simple stock exchange I made. I am going to integrate live market data soon http://sigmatrader.com/trade.php
Re:Thank God one of the candidates wants to off FE by Coisiche · 2012-10-30 22:51 · Score: 1

Think I might go build a mountain city in Scotland
Just to warn you then, the weather here has been more shite than usual lately. Maybe better than other places in the world but the recent decade has been much worse than the previous three. I can't comment on weather prior to that on account of being too young to remember and ultimately not even existing.
PA got hit hard by helix2301 · 2012-10-31 03:50 · Score: 1

I live in PA and we got hit hard people for 1 to 2 weeks expected with no power or phones. We have lost over 16 power stations. I am a ham radio operator and we have been helping people who do not have phones and no way of communicating. We got hit hard and we are on out skirts so I can only imagine what NY and NJ going threw.

--
http://www.thetechnologygeek.org
explanation please by anonieuweling · 2012-10-31 04:30 · Score: 1

Why does the USA have these disasters each time?
Now it's New York.
Their biggest financial center TOTALLY disabled and destroyed for an estimated 50-100 billion dollars.
No real protection against water.
Our 2nd Maasvlakte -an industrial/harbour area- has 18 meters of levees.
What height of protection did Manhattan have?
Do we need to send aid to build some protection against the water for our former colony?
They deserve what they got. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-31 11:12 · Score: 0

Anyone living in the low lying costal areas like NYC should be well aware that storm surges will wipe their little assets out. Building a data center in such a place is absolutely foolhardy. Living there is stupid enough.