[HN Gopher] A field guide to the central, creeping section of th...
___________________________________________________________________
A field guide to the central, creeping section of the San Andreas
Fault (2006)
Author : pastureofplenty
Score : 39 points
Date : 2024-10-24 07:11 UTC (15 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.researchgate.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.researchgate.net)
| lupusreal wrote:
| Somehow, even photographs taken more than 30 years ago get
| flipped upsidedown when posted on the internet. Flipping images
| with metadata tags, which are inevitably ignored or stripped, has
| proven to be an extremely user hostile technical decision.
| lelandfe wrote:
| Images can be rotated with metadata? Is that finally an
| explanation for why I'll sometimes rotate an image on my
| computer, upload it, and find the uploaded copy in the original
| rotation?
| jefftk wrote:
| For JPEG this is the EXIF Orientation flag:
| https://jdhao.github.io/2019/07/31/image_rotation_exif_info/
|
| It allows the camera to write almost its output without
| considering how you're holding the camera, and then write
| just three bits to indicate how it should be displayed.
|
| (It should be two bits, since the third logical bit is for
| mirroring, except the specific flag values they chose for the
| non-mirrored rotations were 0x0, 0x2, 0x5, and 0x7.)
| dunham wrote:
| Yeah and web browsers ignore it for compatibility with web
| browsers that ignored it.
|
| I believe rotation is lossy if you don't do it in metadata
| and the file is using subsampling.
|
| Edit: some sites will rotate the file on upload, especially
| for scaled, non-original versions, to avoid this issue. I've
| done this at work in the past.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| So frustrating to try and look at these.
| fckgw wrote:
| If you scroll down into the PDF they're also there in the
| correct orientation.
| ben_w wrote:
| How does law treat boundary disputes when the land itself shifts?
| culebron21 wrote:
| If I understand correctly, most land lots are in local
| coordinate systems and use ground-based anchors as reference,
| not geographical coordinates (sky, GPS). When there's a slip,
| the only difficulty is to re-mark the zigzag.
|
| That works very well for Australia that moves northwards at 10
| cm per year, IIRC.
| pfdietz wrote:
| Australia as a whole moves northward? That wouldn't alter
| local relationships. The concern would be when land moves on
| a fault and plots become distorted, like those well known
| pictures of roads and streams jogging sideways on the San
| Andreas fault.
| culebron21 wrote:
| I meant that if Australia had geographical coordinates in
| the land lots definitions, they'd have become very
| incorrect in a couple of decades.
| foobarian wrote:
| The point is that if our properties are defined using
| survey markers (like my deed, which literally spells out in
| English where the plot starts, how many feet this way and
| that) this will stand up to ground shifting. It will be the
| mapmakers' problem to redraw the maps though.
| lazide wrote:
| It doesn't stand up to shifting, often, because one
| landmark at one corner may move relative to another. If
| the fault is through the middle of the property.
| potato3732842 wrote:
| Yes, it does. The square footage of a particular parcel
| would be what changes.
|
| This frequently comes up when parcels are defined as
| being bounded by a river or something. 999x/1000 it's a
| non-issue.
| plorg wrote:
| I assume the conflict would arise if two adjacent parcels
| defined by fixed size borders were defined by different
| survey markers that moved relative to each other,
| creating a space that is unclaimed, a space that is
| claimed under both deeds, or some of both. Probably in
| the course of resolving this conflict the parties who
| owned the conflicted land would get new surveys performed
| and perhaps have additional survey markers installed to
| define the new border for both parcels.
|
| The point of conflict here being that not every vertex of
| a parcel is necessarily defined by a survey marker.
| ben_w wrote:
| Sure, but the ground is moving relative to other ground, so
| ground anchors can be in conflict.
|
| Also, IIRC San Andreas is a transform fault? So conservative?
| But not all are. Or are ridges and subduction limited to
| oceanic crust?
| mattpallissard wrote:
| This is how it works where I live in the US. When a river
| channel moves someone gains and someone loses.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| In California in particular:
|
| > If the boundaries of land owned either by public or by
| private entities have been disturbed by earth movements such
| as, but not limited to, slides, subsidence, lateral or vertical
| displacements or similar disasters caused by man, or by
| earthquake or other acts of God, so that such lands are in a
| location different from that at which they were located prior
| to the disaster, an action in rem may be brought to equitably
| reestablish boundaries and to quiet title to land within the
| boundaries so reestablished.
|
| https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.x...
| .
| fsckboy wrote:
| > _an action in rem may be brought to equitably reestablish
| boundaries and to quiet title_
|
| from duckduckgo search (pulled from wikpedia? idk)
|
| _In rem jurisdiction_
|
| _In rem jurisdiction is a legal term describing the power a
| court may exercise over property or a "status" against a
| person over whom the court does not have in personam
| jurisdiction. Jurisdiction in rem assumes the property or
| status is the primary object of the action, rather than
| personal liabilities not necessarily associated with the
| property._
|
| I hope that clears up any confusion!
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| You don't file a lawsuit against your neighbor, more like
| you are filing a lawsuit against the boundary line. You and
| your neighbor go to court; there is a process to determine
| the new boundaries that are as fair to everyone as
| possible.
|
| If you and your neighbor have already decided ahead of time
| what is fair, then the courtroom stuff is probably just
| rubber-stamping and recording it so that when one of you
| sells the next owner has a clean title. If the two of you
| don't agree then at least you've got someone neutral to
| help out. The whole thing seems to be a bit absurd but what
| is better?
| cruffle_duffle wrote:
| > The whole thing seems to be a bit absurd but what is
| better?
|
| Why absurd? To me it feels like the rational way to sort
| it out.
|
| Wonder what Hawaii does or any other place where it isn't
| unusual for "new land" to be created. Like if your lot
| along the coast gets extended by volcanic action does
| your properly line get auto-extended as well or does the
| extension become part of the public shoreline?
| dragonwriter wrote:
| _In rem_ jurisdiction may be most familiar to people from
| civil forfeiture, where cases are captioned things like
| _U.S. v. Approximately 64,695 pounds of shark fins_ ,
| though the caption of a suit to quiet title or establish
| boundaries will probably be something like _In re_ <general
| description of property at issue>.
| culebron21 wrote:
| Interestingly, the concrete channel looks similar to those in
| Central Asia. (The latter have holes in them to let water seep
| into the ground.) Street view:
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/pvrsiYMCfeADo8NL6
| tetris11 wrote:
| (Unrelated) oh wow, ResearchGate actively begs authors to upload
| their full text in order to make it accessible, but prevent the
| public from downloading said texts unless you have a RG account?
| pastureofplenty wrote:
| I did not notice any images being incorrectly displayed upside-
| down when I submitted this, I apologize if some of you had
| trouble viewing them.
| egl2021 wrote:
| You don't have anything to apologize for; you did everyone a
| service.
| egl2021 wrote:
| Has anyone visited these sites in the last few years? (The field
| trip was in 2006.) Has construction, road repairs, etc. obscured
| many of these? I know of a few roadway offsets in the immediate
| Bay area that have been "fixed" and are no longer visible.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-10-24 23:01 UTC)