13 comments

  • duxup 3 hours ago
  • jagaerglad 2 hours ago
    in a sense it's mind blowing that we had images of stars being born, black holes, cells dividing etc before earthquake faults in motion. Like how the process of how they happen have only been inferred until now
  • cibyr 12 hours ago
    So many autoplaying videos on the page, and none of them are the video that the article is about.
    • DavidSJ 12 hours ago
      This is the original video, for those looking: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=77ubC4bcgRM
      • praptak 12 hours ago
        PSA: it's easy to miss on the first watch because the big action happens in the background behind the gate.
        • wizardforhire 12 hours ago
          Thanks, first watch all I saw was the driveway crack appear. Second pass could be mistaken for a parallax effect as the entire background shifts forward!
          • nobrains 10 hours ago
            So, I recommend seeing it in 3 passes. 1st pass, see the right 1/3rd area of the video. It shows the 2 sides moving. Then see the middle 1/3rd area of the video. It shows both the movement and the rupture in the ground. Then see the left 1/3rd area of the video. It shows the rupture on the ground clearly.
      • frauhaus 8 hours ago
    • fuenaksofu 3 hours ago
      Interesting. I see no other video. I use brave so maybe it blocked all the ads and noise.
      • brabel 2 hours ago
        Firefox with AdBlocker Ultimate. Also saw no other videos, thankfully.
        • throw123xz 1 minute ago
          OT, but the company behind that extension seems to be a bit shady.

          uBlock Origin is open source, very efficient, and seems to be well regarded around these parts.

    • falseprofit 4 hours ago
      It’s the first YouTube embed in the article.
    • everdrive 1 hour ago
      javascript claims another victim. It's not good to run javascript by default.
  • blinding-streak 6 hours ago
    How does property/real estate ownership work in this case? Seeing the land shift so clearly by several feet makes me wonder.

    What was on your property is now on my property!

    • widforss 5 hours ago
      By the discussions I've had with surveyors in my country (Sweden), any coordinate descriptions of properties are deferred to the physical markers in the ground (cairns for older property, metal stakes for newer ones). This would only be an issue in properties that have never been surveyed (and marked) at all.

      Straight borders might become crooked if they cross the crack though.

      • brabel 1 hour ago
        I am also in Sweden, and learned recently that a large part of my property seems to actually belong to the neighbour according to the online map! But there is a page in the relevant authority's website which clarifies that the online map can be 10s of meters off (in Swedish): https://www.lantmateriet.se/sv/kartor/vara-karttjanster/Visa...

        There, it even explains some history and methodology for defining the borders. Mostly, they are defined by physical markers that hopefully the original surveryors left on the ground. I found a couple around my property (which is on hills so it's likely difficult to mark properly on a map from above) and it seems the borders are actually almost correct. As my fences have been up for over 20 years in the same location, I believe they also count now as de-facto borders now!

      • xattt 4 hours ago
        It sure would suck to lose half your property to the earth suddenly saying screw you.
        • MichaelZuo 4 hours ago
          You could lose all your property, without compensation too, if your unlucky enough to have a big enough meteorite crash into it.
          • whycome 4 hours ago
            Or be native
            • __MatrixMan__ 3 hours ago
              The natives lost something, to be sure, but I'm not sure it was property. Property is created when you kick everyone else out. I assume that's the rationale behind "property is theft," it used to be everybody's and now it's yours.
              • gtowey 26 minutes ago
                You're correct. They didn't lose property as they had no legal concept of ownership. Instead they lost their homes, their culture, and their lives. How lucky for them!
                • __MatrixMan__ 4 minutes ago
                  If they work hard enough, perhaps they can buy some of it back. How civilized.
                • laser_eagle 6 minutes ago
                  [dead]
            • ipaddr 58 minutes ago
              Natives signed treaties which are still respected today.
            • immibis 2 hours ago
              Or Palestinian
              • reliabilityguy 2 hours ago
                Or any other nation during any of the conflicts. You are aware that Arabs were not the only ones who lost their property, Jews lost theirs too.
            • mc32 4 hours ago
              Or lose a war, or bet your property or not pay taxes or eminent domain… but I guess nomads never had a immovable property claim.
    • bapak 1 hour ago
      Area doesn't just disappear. I suppose that depending on what's on the land, your area might have a few more potatoes from your northern neighbors and fewer carrots you generously gifted to your southern neighbors.

      You could alternatively just deal with your new jagged plot.

      Worst case scenario, you're now the owner of the new Turkish Canyon.

      • georgeburdell 1 hour ago
        I don’t think there’s a universally accepted solution but in California it would be up to the state to figure it out. It would be a great time to be a Real Estate lawyer after a quake there.
        • stockresearcher 53 minutes ago
          California has the Cullen Earthquake Act.

          Essentially one affected party comes up with a proposed solution, files paperwork with the court, and then all the rest of the affected parties get together (under court supervision) to make whatever changes are necessary until the solution is fair. If the court agrees that it is a fair solution, it becomes final.

          https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-ccp/part-2/titl...

      • dehrmann 1 hour ago
        > Area doesn't just disappear

        Land area does in a subduction zone.

  • gnabgib 14 hours ago
    Discussion (81 points, 3 days ago, 13 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44655128
  • v3ss0n 11 hours ago
    4.x l to 5.x earthquakes are still happening a few times a week and the area couldn't recover from disaster. last week, one 4 stories building next to my friend house collapsed,near Mandalay.

    Does that mean Myanmar is now an active zone?

    • jofer 2 hours ago
      It's always been active. The Sagaing fault is a plate boundary. You're seeing the "side" of the Indian subcontinent slamming northward into the Eurasian plate.
  • dzdt 4 hours ago
  • ranger_danger 14 hours ago
    Isn't this news several months old?
    • schobi 10 hours ago
      A previous discussion of the M7.7 quake in Burma/Myanmar from March 28, 2025 was provided by Sean Wilsey. He explained the earthquake and context and discussed the CCTV footage around 6:30 https://youtu.be/CfKFK4-HNmk
    • andrewflnr 13 hours ago
      It seems like the analysis is the new part.
    • ofalkaed 9 hours ago
      Quadrennial myopia.
  • KennyBlanken 1 hour ago
    The entire camera clearly dips and then rises during the fault slide. It's not the fault moving in a curved path, it's the camera dipping and rising. You can clearly see that just by placing your finger or mouse cursor on any feature in the video.
  • kristopolous 13 hours ago
    I know nothing so help me here. Why is this so rare? Aren't earthquakes, cameras, and monitoring of them pretty common?
    • irjustin 13 hours ago
      Videos of earthquakes are common enough.

      It's the video of the fault line itself fracturing that's so interesting.

      We know where the fault lines are, so we generally avoid building anything major near them because... well earthquakes. Hence no other videos of actual fault line fractures (vs general street ones).

      • zellyn 13 minutes ago
        The California Memorial Stadium is built directly on a fault line, right?
        • rkomorn 10 minutes ago
          Yep. Had a pretty significant renovation/retrofit in 2010-2012 ago to address the fact that the fault had (among other things) caused some walls to start coming apart.
  • netbioserror 13 hours ago
    Terrifying. I program automated vibration analysis for blasting, and a very powerful explosive blast will feature particle velocities (the direct corollary for power) in the single-digit in/s range (~0.02-0.13 m/s) . This peak particle velocity is 20-150x higher than the peaks we see from the most powerful blasts we measure, if they're at all qualitatively comparable.

    And of course, the earthquake energy source is many magnitudes larger and much, much further away, deep in the crust, with the wavefront already having passed through miles of solid rock. We measure blasts from at most a few hundred meters away.

    • card_zero 13 hours ago
      in/s? Inches per second, or something else? One inch per second is the speed of an excited snail.
      • netbioserror 36 minutes ago
        This is the solid particles in the ground moving in place. As the wave passes through, any given volume of ground is displaced somewhat. In a balanced low-intensity wave, the soil or rock gets jostled around a bit. In a high-intensity balanced wave, the ground is yanked back and forth, potentially damaging foundations or buildings above the foundation. Particles will be displaced, but not permanently, with a net of 0.

        In an unbalanced wave, the earth is permanently displaced in a particular direction. We can measure that net displacement in a particular direction using an anti-derivative if the total average velocity is nonzero (if we included negative velocities around a given axis). Earthquakes, of course, tend to have nonzero net displacement, and thus an extremely biased velocity waveform along a particular axis.

        So in fact, the soil beneath you vibrating back and forth at 1 to 5 inches per second is not fun. At 118 inches per second? Catastrophe.

      • Aachen 5 hours ago
        Must be inches per second because 1–10 of those is 0.025–0.25 m/s so that matches the parentheses
      • csours 13 hours ago
        in soil, not air.
  • moomoo11 13 hours ago
    Silly question but how does this affect mapping software? Or is the movement insignificant that it doesn’t matter
  • varispeed 8 hours ago
    It is remarkable how widespread of CCTV has helped in that field. Imagine being a scientist and never actually experience or see the earthquake you are into researching. That be like going to place where they are common and then sit a year or so and anticipating. Is it coming? Should be any time soon? Then when it happens you are in the toilet and have seen nothing apart from painting falling off the wall.
    • latexr 6 hours ago
      How about waiting over a decade and be getting a drink when it happens? Then waiting another decade and a technical problem preventing it from having been recorded.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_drop_experiment#Universi...

      • qntmfred 2 hours ago
        also reminds me of:

        in 1663 Scottish mathematician James Gregory figured out that you could calculate the distance between the Earth and the Sun by making measurements during the transit of Mercury or Venus across the Sun. You get much more accurate results with Venus, but the next transit of Venus wasn't predicted to be until 1761 and 1769.

        In 1760 French mathematician Guillaume Le Gentil sailed from France to India to make observations of the transit, but due to weather and delays, he was still on the ship when summer 1761 arrived and he missed his chance to make his measurements. So he stayed in India for another 8 years. And then on the day of the 1769 transit, it was cloudy and he missed it again. So he went back to France where he found out he had long ago been declared dead, his possessions had been seized and his wife had married somebody else.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDSM-CtYzxY&t=5m29s