Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

How Russia Transformed a Subtropical Beach Resort To Host the Winter Olympics

timothy posted about 6 months ago | from the putin-alone-between-prizefights dept.

Earth 359

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Duncan Geere reports at The Verge that Russian resort as Sochi, on the eastern shore of the Black Sea, is humid and subtropical with temperatures averaging about 52 degrees Fahrenheit (12 C) in the winter, and 75 degrees (24 C) in the summer. "There is almost no snow here — at the moment it's raining," says Olga Mironova, a local resident. It's estimated that the cost of staging the Olympics in Sochi has been greater than the previous three Winter Games combined — ballooning to a whopping $51 billion including the cost of implementing an extensive system of safeguards to ensure there'll be sufficient snow in Sochi for the games including the cost of implementing one of the largest snowmaking systems in Europe. The system includes two huge water reservoirs that feed 400 snow cannons installed along the slopes that can generate snow in temperatures of up to 60 degrees fahrenheit (16 C). If that snow isn't enough, then the authorities will fall back on 710,000 cubic meters of snow collected during the winters of previous years leading up to the games. To keep it from melting in the region's hot summers, 10 separate stockpiles have been kept packed tight under insulating covers high up in the mountains, safe from the sun's rays. Down in Sochi itself the other half of the games will be held in five indoor arenas that will host figure skating, speed skating, hockey, and curling, and an additional outdoor area will host the opening and closing ceremonies. In each of these indoor arenas, underfloor cooling systems are installed so that the ice stays frozen above it using propylene glycol, which doesn't freeze until temperatures reach 8.6 F (-13 C). Climatologists predict that even under a best-case scenario, almost half the venues that have hosted the Winter Olympics over the last century would be unable to do so by 2080 without resorting to extensive and expensive artificial snowmaking techniques.""

cancel ×

359 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Celsius (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209129)

Temperatures are usually reported in degrees Celsius. Please fix this.

Re:Celsius (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209291)

It would even be clearer to most people here if you did it in kelvins rather than Fahrenheit.

IRT Beta... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209507)

The interesting thing about this is that when using Beta, the default view is to show everything. So, if you are using Beta, these trollish anti-beta things are perfectly visible, while if you are on Classic they just get filtered out with the rest of the trolls. So, if you really like Classic and hate Beta, the best thing you can do is try to post an anti-beta, pro-classic threat to leave the site as first post instead of Frosty Piss or whatever. That way, if any advertisers to who Dice is trying to market its new shiny actually check out the site, they will see the user dissatisfaction with the design immediately. Then, in subsequent threads we can go on having our usual geeky conversations in Classic.

Re: Cels...FICK BETA!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209295)

Fick it right in the ass!

Re: Cels...FICK BETA!!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209583)

Fick it right in the ass!

Is /. reduced to attracting morons like this?

Re: Cels...FICK BETA!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209947)

Apparently they've been around for a long time but just hiding and lurking or pretending to post intelligently.

Re:Celsius (5, Informative)

the_cosmocat (1009803) | about 6 months ago | (#46209409)

Yes, it's time to give up! http://imgur.com/3ZidINK [imgur.com] and to use the metric system also : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... [wikipedia.org]

Re:Celsius (-1, Troll)

SCHecklerX (229973) | about 6 months ago | (#46210091)

For length, at least, our system is more natural. You can easily divide a foot, for example, into thirds, halves, quarters. Not so much with base 10.

Temperature, mass, etc came about in the same way.

Nature isn't base 10, other than the number of fingers and toes we have.

Re:Celsius (4, Insightful)

Minwee (522556) | about 6 months ago | (#46210191)

You can easily divide a foot, for example, into thirds, halves, quarters. Not so much with base 10.

If you can't easily divide the number ten into two equal halves, then perhaps you have bigger problems than just which set of units to use.

Seriously? (3, Insightful)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 6 months ago | (#46210251)

Allow me to divide one meter by the amounts you mentioned:

3 - 0,333mm (use as much precision as you'd like)
2 - 0,500mm
4 - 0,250mm

Now, allow me to do something you can't do trivially with imperial units:

How many centimeters does a kilometer have?

1km = 1000m = 100.000cm

Try doing that under 5 seconds with imperial units.

You only insult yourself by using such stupid arguments. SI is better.

Re:Celsius (1, Insightful)

argStyopa (232550) | about 6 months ago | (#46209413)

American website reporting largely to Americans is going to use American measures.

You want to report in Celsius, start your own?

Anyway, people who want a genuinely objective temperature scale use Kelvin.

Re:Celsius (3, Informative)

kbg (241421) | about 6 months ago | (#46209559)

The Metric Conversion Act [wikipedia.org] would disagree with you.

Re:Celsius (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209639)

Fucking statist homo, pointing to the government and lisping, "They are telling us to do this, so like a good faggot, I'm going to obey!"

Go suck a cock.

Re:Celsius (2)

thaylin (555395) | about 6 months ago | (#46209677)

No it doesnt. This is not trade and commerce, or I would agree with you.

Re:Celsius (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209755)

Or, if you were a knob-gobbling, bone-smuggling, nut-humming, cum-guzzling pirate smoker, you might agree with him too.

Re:Celsius (1)

psergiu (67614) | about 6 months ago | (#46209991)

As Slashdot is offering paying subscriptions and is geting money from the advertisers, IT IS commerce - a commecial web site.

Can someone please find where we can file a complaint against Dice Holdings for failing to follow U.S. Executive Order 12770 ?

Re:Celsius (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about 6 months ago | (#46210137)

It's probably hard for people in other countries to understand, but the Metric Conversion Act merely indicated that the metric system was the PREFERRED system, not the "required" system.
Further, Executive Order 12770 is relevant only to government agencies.

This was back when the US government had fewer abilities to simply order its citizens (you know, the ones laughably in charge?) to do what it wants on a whim.

Re:Celsius (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209587)

Different scales for different uses. Scientific measuring? Kelvin. Cooking? Celcius. Weather? Farenheit, which is scaled such as a degree is a noticable difference but no more, a hundred degrees is a human with a slight fever, and zero feels like it can't possibly get any colder.

Metric is digital, US is analog; it's easier to do fractions in the US system (meaning that inches and feet are obsolete, since the world id now digital).

Re:Celsius (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 6 months ago | (#46210023)

Weather? Farenheit

No. Weather? Metric.

'Zero degrees? Uh oh, looks like it might snow.'

'It's FORTY-FIVE degrees in Las Vegas? Holy cow! That's nearly half-way to boiling!'

Re:Celsius (3, Interesting)

argStyopa (232550) | about 6 months ago | (#46210157)

Celsius merely replaces one set of 'arbitrary' reference points (human warmest/typical =100 and coldest/typical = 0) with another (the freezing/boiling points of a hypothetically-pure water in a specific set of pressure circumstances = 0/100 respectively).

Aside from that, it's what people grew up & are comfortable with.
Well, the only other difference is that I don't see Americans being evangelical about trying to convince anyone to use their system. (Shrug)

Re:Celsius (2)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 6 months ago | (#46210197)

Aside from that, it's what people grew up & are comfortable with.

I'm people, I didn't grow up with it and I'm not comfortable with it.

All that being said, there are a lot of things that are bananas in the USA compared to the rest of the world. Use of the Fahrenheit system is *way* down the list of crazy to the point where it's almost a rounding error.

It's degrees celsius (4, Insightful)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 6 months ago | (#46210309)

All systems of measurements are based on arbitrary references.

The difference is that SI is a coherent system of base and derived units with very simple relationships between them, all based on the number 10 and a series of greek prefixes.

Nobody ever asks themselves (*kids still learning the basics excepted) how many meters are in a kilometer. Knowing that, nobody is going to be left wondering how many grams there are in a kilogram or how many newtons in a kilonewton. The keyword is coherency.

SI is coherent within itself and with the numerical system used by nearly everyone on this planet (base 10). Imperial units are neither.

Also, SI is used in all but three countries. Don't you think those three countries might have done things wrong?

Re:Celsius (4, Insightful)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 6 months ago | (#46209771)

reporting largely to Americans

Are you sure about that?

Re:Celsius (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about 6 months ago | (#46210195)

Alexa says /. is 37% Indian-origin, 27% US - I find that hard to believe, given the amount of time they spend on bullshit US political issues. Their total % only reaches about 70-some percent.

Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (2, Funny)

AcidPenguin9873 (911493) | about 6 months ago | (#46209769)

The 0-100 degreen range of Farenheit better represents the range of temperatures that humans encounter. http://imgur.com/gallery/ucOQh [imgur.com]

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (1)

gtirloni (1531285) | about 6 months ago | (#46209799)

Surely that is not subjective at all.

Crazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46210301)

Why establish a unit system commensurate with human experience? Hmmm....

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (2)

Hypotensive (2836435) | about 6 months ago | (#46209997)

Also, feet and inches are clearly superior to metres since they are related to measurements of humans rather than the Earth. Or some human, probably.

And gallons are clearly superior to litres because I know how many gallons I get to a mile, and I have no idea how many litres to the metre. QED.

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 6 months ago | (#46210053)

In the very scientific scale of "really"s in the cartoon that you link, I would argue that 0F is way more really cold than 100F is really hot, or, in other words, 0F is more reallys on the cold scale as opposed to 100F is reallys on the hot scale.

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#46210223)

As somebody who lives in Canada, I have to say that 0 Fahrenheit (-17 C) isn't that cold as long as you dress appropriately. You could argue that any temperature isn't cold depending on how you dress, but -17C is pretty arbitrary. -5C would be quite uncomfortable if you decided to go out in shorts and t-shirt. If I had to shoot for a general range that humans encounter, I'd probably put it somewhere around -40C to +50C, which puts us around -40 to 122 Fahrenheit, which is quite outside the range of 0 to 100. -17 is warm enough that you could stay outside all day and not feel cold provided you wore some decent winter clothing. -40 is so cold that you'll get quite code after a short time out even in high quality winter clothing if you aren't moving around enough.

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (2)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | about 6 months ago | (#46210257)

It's not that hard:
0 degrees C = water freezes
100 degrees C = water boils
We "encounter" these temperatures all the time, and they can be reproduced easily in your own kitchen with very good accuracy compared to the subjective "really cold" or "really hot" of the F scale.

Re:Fahrenheit is more naturally understood (1)

Buzer (809214) | about 6 months ago | (#46210311)

The image isn't really true. Lots of people are regularly sitting in places in which the temperature are even over 100C and not many are dieing because of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauna [wikipedia.org]

Re:Celsius (0, Troll)

T.E.D. (34228) | about 6 months ago | (#46209777)

Temperatures are usually reported in degrees Celsius.

Not in the USA (the country that hosts this website), they aren't. If you don't like that, I'm sure there are lots of other websites in the world hosted in Europe or Canada for you to visit. That's how you "fix" this problem.

AGW is a scam (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209133)

How do warmists explain that in my air conditioned house, temperature never goes above 70 farhenheit? AGW doesn't exist. What exists is AIC (anthopological indoor cooling).

How Dice transformed Slashdot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209137)

Into a noxious pile of shit with Beta.

Sochi = Slashdort (0)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 6 months ago | (#46209141)

The capitalist counterrevolution in 1992 made the Soviet Union a hell for working people, women, national minorities!

Capitalism made Slashdort Beta the abomination that it is and is forcing the Slashdort/Dice garbage on us!

Capitalism must go!

Re:Sochi = Slashdort (-1, Offtopic)

g4sy (694060) | about 6 months ago | (#46209371)

hmm lets do a test then. capitalism would dictate that a bunch of well-paid geeks would be able to vote with their feet.... aww fuck this

fuck beta

60 degrees F and 710,000 cubic metres. Idiots. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209153)

Sort out your units, or you lose the right to use any of them.

Re:60 degrees F and 710,000 cubic metres. Idiots. (4, Funny)

Mashiki (184564) | about 6 months ago | (#46209631)

Oh just wait until you come to Canada, neighboring the US especially in Southern Ontario or Alberta you have: Meat, veggies, fruit and bulk goods weighed in, grams and lbs. Lumber by the ft, and meter, road signs in various spots in mph and km/h. Liquid in containers, in fl oz, quart and ml, or liters. And to top it all off you get screwed over when buying gasoline.

Then again, you could go to the UK and get baffled by stones.

Re:60 degrees F and 710,000 cubic metres. Idiots. (2)

Boronx (228853) | about 6 months ago | (#46209963)

Indeed. What's the meaning of Stonehenge?!

Re:60 degrees F and 710,000 cubic metres. Idiots. (1)

Xest (935314) | about 6 months ago | (#46210241)

To be honest even stones are dying out in the UK. I was bought up on them but if you make use of the NHS at all then you'll be given weights in kg, and you'll be told your weight in kg. The change is working well, I don't even know what I weigh in stones now even though I used to only know that. I do know what I weigh in kg though.

As long as they don't get rid of the pint then we're all good.

Thinking about the Olympics (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209155)

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction.
Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.
Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.
Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons Of mass destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.
Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.
Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.
Q: That doesn't make sense. Why would they choose to die if They had all those big weapons with which they could have fought back?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.
Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.
Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.
Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to Invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.
Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.
Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.
Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.
Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.
Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.
Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.
Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.
Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government Passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being
communists and started being capitalists like us.
Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.
Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.
Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he's not really a Legitimate leader anyway.
Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.
Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.
Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.
Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by Forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an Illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.
Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.
Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men - fifteen of them Saudi Arabians - hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 Americans.
Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.
Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.
Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a Good job fighting drugs.
Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.
Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.
Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for Growing flowers, that was OK, but not if hey cut people's heads and Hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands for stealing bread.
Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the
penalty for women who did not comply.
Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.
Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except For her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of Patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her Eyes and fingers.
Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.
Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.
Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.
Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.
Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.
Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.
Q: So the Soviets - I mean, the Russians - are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to Support our invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.
Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French Fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.
Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't Do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade...
Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.
Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.
Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.
Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.
Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.
Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American Corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time all the better.
Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side anyone who opposes war is a godless unAmerican Communist. Do you understand now why we attached Iraq?
Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.
Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.
Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head.
A: Yes! You finally understand how the world works, Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Goodnight.

Goodnight daddy.

Re:Thinking about the Olympics (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209281)

Did Obama do something last night that we need to be distracted about. Usually don't pull out the Bush did it card til we need to distract from his actions.

Re:Thinking about the Olympics (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209325)

Would someone please mod this guy down to nothing?
Please please please please please?

Re:Thinking about the Olympics (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209403)

ROFLMAO You should submit this script to "Saturday Night Live" or for a more politically satirical delivery contact "The Rick Mercer Report."

Hm From Where Did RU Copy This? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209163)

RU copies everything they have ever done. I am at a loss from where this came. Maybe L. Ron has come back! Only he could have thought of something so stupid, that it was believed.

Re:Hm From Where Did RU Copy This? (2)

AlabamaCajun (2710177) | about 6 months ago | (#46209369)

That Q&A is a hard fact that except for some drift it comes so close to what is reality, We were driven to near austerity in the 80s with the this mentality. Here we were in the 2000s and nearly achieved it the second time around in that same geographical area. History is being denied just as AGW is now being denied. It's time to stop living the American dream which for most has been a nightmare and start living the American Reality. We have to address global warming with the same attitude as a Soviet invasion would have been that never came to be. A few more questions .
Q. How come we can't watch the Olympics?
A. Because we don't have a cable provider and our video stream is not a sponsor of the NBC networks.
Q. But I thought the Olympics were for everyone including so we could support our team?
A. They are but the sponsoring is now controlled by greedy networks that are run by exclusive clubs owned by the elite.
Q. Do the elite believe in AGW?
A. ...

Had to slip that one in there, right? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209201)

another climate-change dig. Why not just tick to the fact that Sochi wasn't a good location for this to begin with?

Stupid (2)

Mikkeles (698461) | about 6 months ago | (#46209203)

Taking a semi-tropical place and turning it into an expensive, barely working winter wonderland is a very stupid idea. Implementing it is even stupider.

Re:Stupid (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209213)

You can construct an infinite number of provable sierpinski numbers through finding what are called "covering sets". These are sets of factors that repeat in the sequence k*2^n+1, with fixed k, and variable n. e.g. as long as k is not divisible by 3, then half of the values k*2^n+1 will be divisible by 3. For some k it will be the even n's, for other k it will be the odd n's. Either way, you've already covered half the possibilities with a known factor. Fill in 1/4 of the values by ensuring that 5 divides half of the ones not divisible by 3, hey presto - only 1/4 now remain. 17 can remove 1/8, leaving 1/8. 65537 can remove 1/16, leaving 1/16. Between them, 241, 97 and 673 can remove 1/16 (as they can each remove 1/48). That's it - there's your covering set {3,5,17,65537,241,97,673}.

Re:Stupid (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209297)

Taking a semi-tropical place and turning it into an expensive, barely working winter wonderland is a very stupid idea. Implementing it is even stupider.

Calling it semi-tropical is a bit of a stretch, as someone else pointed out it is more northerly than Buffalo, NY. But, this will be a problem for other places as well. There was just a study done for the Oslo, Norway 2022 winter olympic candidacy, that showed that with current trends there is a very high risk of not having enough snow. If even Norway can't reliably provide enough winter for future winter olympics then very few places can.

Re:Stupid (2)

wagnerrp (1305589) | about 6 months ago | (#46209367)

Well if tropical is anything between the tropics, namely from -23 to 23 degrees, and the arctic is from -90 to -67 degrees and 67 to 90 degrees, Sochi sitting at 43.5 degrees is nearly right in the middle, hence semi-tropic. Of course, that would also make it semi-arctic by that logic, which sounds like a pretty good place to hold Winter Olympics.

Re:Stupid (3, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#46209537)

Well,at 43 degrees, it sits right about the same latitude as Toronto, a few degrees north of Salt lake City, a bit south of Vancouver, and a bit south of Turin (the last 3 of which also hosted the Olympics). Latitude really says very little about climate, especially when you are close to the ocean, or other very large bodies of water like the Black Sea. Toronto's weather is actually quite cold, and the only reason they couldn't host the winter Olympics is the lack of mountains. Vancouver, despite being north Toronto, actually has quite warmer weather.

The next one around is in South Korea at 37 degrees latitude, and seems to be close to the ocean, although just about everything is close to the ocean in South Korea, by the standards of someone who lives in Canada. It seems their goal is to host the Winter Olympics in increasingly ridiculous climates, eventually to the point of getting the Winter Olympics in Dubai.

Re:Stupid (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209581)

It seems their goal is to host the Winter Olympics in increasingly ridiculous climates, eventually to the point of getting the Winter Olympics in Dubai.

Well, if even Norway climate is going the way of having to rely on artificial snow for future winter olympics they just as well might..

Re:Stupid (3, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#46209825)

Also worth mentioning that there probably aren't that many ski resorts out there that don't use artificial snow. Whether it's to have the hill open in November, or just to make sure the base of the mountain is well covered. Artificial snow also provides a really good, solid base that will allow the resort to stay open longer into the spring as well. Perhaps up in the Alps such measures are not needed, because the snow doesn't melt in the sumer, but most places that I've been to use snow making equipment because just getting enough snow on the hill to handle the amount of traffic (skiing on show will push it to the sides of the hill), and to cover up rocks, requires that artificial snow will be used.

Re:Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209301)

This just in: There is Snow Skiing in Driving Distance of Reno, NV also!!!

http://www.skilaketahoe.com/

Why is it news that a subtropical resort would have snow conditions in nearby mountains???

Re:Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209463)

It is news when the snow requires snow-making machines.

Re:Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209461)

Giant fucking waste of money. Kinda like an allegory for what the olympics themselves have become...

Re:Stupid (2)

timeOday (582209) | about 6 months ago | (#46209995)

It is working out well for the Olympics though. I was watching it yesterday, there's plenty of snow and it was a bright, beautiful day. Didn't match the tone of all these relentlessly whiny articles at all.

Climatologists predict (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209215)

Climatologists predict that even under a best-case scenario, almost half the venues that have hosted the Winter Olympics over the last century would be unable to do so by 2080 bullshit

!Subtropical. (0)

msauve (701917) | about 6 months ago | (#46209229)

43.5 degrees N (more northerly than Buffalo, NY) is not "subtropical."

Re:!Subtropical. (2)

tgv (254536) | about 6 months ago | (#46209237)

But 43.5 degrees C is!

Re:!Subtropical. (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209317)

43.5 degrees N (more northerly than Buffalo, NY) is not "subtropical."

The word "subtropics" refers to a particular location. The word "subtropical" can refer to any area that has characteristics similar to the subtropics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_locations_with_a_subtropical_climate

Hey lookie there: Eurasia -> Russia -> Sochi

Re:!Subtropical. (1, Flamebait)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about 6 months ago | (#46209513)

For the benefit of people who using non-murican units:

52 degrees F = 12 C (approx)
75 degrees F = 25 C (approx)

Never mind their actual latitude, from spending most of my life within 5 degrees of the tropics, about the only time we see 75 degrees in summer is in the middle of a heavy thunderstorm. Even the lows are more likely to be in the 80s (25-30 C) during summer months.

Re:!Subtropical. (2)

Sique (173459) | about 6 months ago | (#46209573)

Actually, "subtropical" is a description of climate, not of place on the map. And from a climate point of view, Sochi is subtropical. Yes, Sochi might lie more north than Buffalo, NY. But still, it's warmer the whole year than Buffalo, NY. Rome is north of New York City. Palermo, Sicily is about as north as Baltimore. But Sicily is definitely subtropical.

Sochi Project by Rob Hornstra & Arnold van Bru (2)

thegoldenear (323630) | about 6 months ago | (#46209243)

Not to nention that Sochi is characterised by poverty, separatism, terrorism and mass beach tourism:
http://www.thesochiproject.org... [thesochiproject.org]

Pete Boyd

The $51 billion is nothing to do with the location (5, Insightful)

Viol8 (599362) | about 6 months ago | (#46209305)

Its down to the monumental institutionalised corruption in Russia where everyone from the highest level apparatchik down to the brick layer is on the take.

Re:The $51 billion is nothing to do with the locat (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 6 months ago | (#46209705)

Yes but in such a system, woe be to the local bureaucrat who fucks up Dear Leader's I 'r Sewious plans just to line his pockets.

Putin's Games (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209309)

These games are also a show of the absolutely incredible depth of corruption in Russia. The initial budget of $12 billion has ballooned to over four times to some $50 billion – the most expensive winter or summer Olympics in the history. The 45-kilometre road from Sochi to the outdoor venues alone cost $8 billion, enough to pave the finished road with 5-millimetre thick gold. It was a common arrangement in the Olympic construction projects to use the money as follows: 30% for the actual construction work, 35% to the officials and 35% to the "oligarchs" who oversaw the project. And let's not forget how the Sochi locals who happened to live near the coming Olympic venues have been brutally forced on the streets without any compensation for their expropriated property, thanks to a special law that Putin had passed in Duma. You should see the documentary Putin's Games [youtube.com] for some background on the mind-boggling amounts of corruption in these games.

Re:Putin's Games (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209447)

These games are also a show of the absolutely incredible depth of corruption in Russia. The initial budget of $12 billion has ballooned to over four times to some $50 billion – the most expensive winter or summer Olympics in the history. The 45-kilometre road from Sochi to the outdoor venues alone cost $8 billion, enough to pave the finished road with 5-millimetre thick gold. It was a common arrangement in the Olympic construction projects to use the money as follows: 30% for the actual construction work, 35% to the officials and 35% to the "oligarchs" who oversaw the project. And let's not forget how the Sochi locals who happened to live near the coming Olympic venues have been brutally forced on the streets without any compensation for their expropriated property, thanks to a special law that Putin had passed in Duma. You should see the documentary Putin's Games [youtube.com] for some background on the mind-boggling amounts of corruption in these games.

Sounds like business as usual for every modern-day Olympics in every host country. What's your point? Besides did the POTUS ever playing with a Siberian Tiger on his lap?

ridiculos! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209321)

Ok. I'm frankly sick and tired of all this media campaign of discrediting the Russian olympic games. I mean, this article is completely ridiculous.

As a comparison, the weather in Sochi is similar to the one in Grenoble (at least from a temperature point of view). Now, the thing is that I live in Grenoble, which was also the location of the olympic games in the 60's. Like in Sochi, right now it is raining in Grenoble, and the temperatures are around 10 degrees Celsius. Despite this, just yesterday I went skiing at the resort which hosted the downhill event in the 60's and guess what? Perfect skiing conditions, all slopes were open and no artificial snow has been used in the last 4 weeks. How is this possible? Well, most of the events at the winter olympic games are hosted in the mountains, which in the case of Grenoble are 2000 meters above the level of the city. I don't know about Sochi but the Caucas mountains have peaks of over 5000 meters.

Just comparing the temperatures in the biggest city which happens to be located near the actual mountains which host the games is completely stupid!

Re:ridiculos! (2)

swb (14022) | about 6 months ago | (#46210201)

In my experience this is true of most ski areas in the US, too.

The "town" the ski area is located in is much lower than the ski area base. By the time you get to the top of the ski area you're 5000 or more feet above the town and the weather is much different.

In town, it can be high 30s/low 40s (deg. F) and at the top of the ski area it's 15F.

I think the snowmaking observation is a little overblown. I think before the widespread adoption of snowmaking, skiing was always weather dependent. You simply didn't do much downhill skiing until mid-late January until the snow depths were enough to cover the mountain hazards and if it was a year with less snowfall, the season didn't go as long because there wasn't a man-made base.

Once skiing became a big business, snowmaking became a much bigger deal because resorts wanted to start the season in late November (American Thanksgiving holiday) and go until early April (common American 'spring break'). These goals, especially early opening, are hard to achieve without snow making.

Even in Minnesota our biggest ski area, Lutsen, was only about half open when I was there at Christmas and this is a place that's often just too cold to ski comfortably (it was -12 F at 6 AM the day we skied, high was maybe 5 that day).

What a steaming pile... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209351)

This is atrocious little article. Just another stab at global warming. Why not point out the fact that Dice and beta are just as bad as this reporting.

You have to hand it to the Russians (4, Funny)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 6 months ago | (#46209357)

State of the art megawatt snow-making equipment, stockpiles of snow from bygone years beneath thermal blankets in the mountains, and the employment of Altai Shaman to hold a mystical snow ceremony...

Now, doesn't the lack of shower curtains and door knobs seem a bit pedantic?

Snow in Russia? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209375)

I guess they couldn't find a colder place in such a tiny territory

sounds just like Vancouver n/t (3, Insightful)

Maxwell (13985) | about 6 months ago | (#46209415)

This is the comment I am forced to type.

Making Snow in Russia (3, Insightful)

Trachman (3499895) | about 6 months ago | (#46209439)

Yeah, making snow in Russia... Only in Russia... The cost of Olympic games is more than $50 Billion, or approximately $500 per Russian citizen, that is including babies and retired people. Had most of Russians been asked whether they agree to donate $500 per person they would have told "No". So they blew $50 billion... That is not entirely correct since this $50 billion has transformed to the salaries of the workers, organizers and security, cost of construction materials and the profits for organizers. So it is not all gone to waste. However Olympic games has always been a classic and favorite way of spreading the wealth... upwards. in 50 years we will hear about Russia's summer Olympic games in Arctic pole.

Seriously??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209487)

"Climatologists predict that even under a best-case scenario, almost half the venues that have hosted the Winter Olympics over the last century would be unable to do so by..."

WTF does this have to do with the original article? Except being a shameless plug for 'climatologist' hype. No wonder people don't take 'climatologists' seriously.

And no, a 'climatologist' degree I do not have. Common sense I do have.

Re:Seriously??? (2)

geogob (569250) | about 6 months ago | (#46209753)

Common sense I do have.

Obviously. You have so much of it, that you can completely disregard obvious facts. That must be convenient.

WTF does this have to do with the original article?

It has a lot to do with the original article, which is unfortunately somewhat off track. The subject tackled are the important investments to ensure proper conditions for the winter competition. Sadly the article and the title used by slashdot are missleading, as they suggest these investements are made to transform a sub-tropical climate into a winter paradise. What so many people fail to understand is that the climate up in the mountains IS NOT the same as the one near the sea in the city of Sochi.

So what does it have to do with it? A lot.

What the poster of this article understood but you - and most likely the journalist behind the article - failed to understand is that the a large part of the investments are made to ensure that the proper conditions are met in the competition sites in the mountains (not in the sub-tropical paradise, mind you). The risk of having non-adequate conditions, and thus require the equipement and huge investment behind it - is obviously linked to the climate.

I do not believe Sochi - and the sites in the mountains in the direct neighbourhood - could ever garantee the right conditions, regardless of the outcome of the winter. Hence the large investements. The interesting catch is that many of the past Winter Olympic sites, which could garantee for those conditions, fall in the same category as Sochi due to climate change. This means that these sites would also need similar investments to hold such competition in the future.

But stick to your common sense, widely feed by ignorance and closed mindset.

Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46210043)

Did you just respond to a troll? Moron.

Very inaccurate and deceptive (5, Informative)

GauteL (29207) | about 6 months ago | (#46209495)

While the indoor activities may well be in the City of Sochi, the activities which actually requires a large amount of snow (alpine and nordic) are actually arranged in Rosa Khutor [wikipedia.org] , which may only be 50 km away, but happens to be approximately 1000 meters above sea level, something which does have an impact on the climate.

There may be lots of things wrong with these Olympics, but there is no need to exaggerate.

Yawn (-1, Flamebait)

0123456 (636235) | about 6 months ago | (#46209519)

'Climatologists' predicted that the Arctic would be ice-free by now. That's what happens when you mindlessly follow short-term trends and extrapolate them into the future.

Re:Yawn (1)

geogob (569250) | about 6 months ago | (#46209767)

Have you a better source than the daily mail for that one?

Re:Yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209793)

YAWN...libertarians predicted we'd be in complete anarchy with the collapse of the dollar where only the buyers of guns, gold and bitcoin would survive.

That's what happens when you follow short bus ideas and extrapolate them into the future.

Re:Yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46210237)

Climate change is bad science corrupted by money and politics. It's an embarrassment.

That was very interesting... (4, Insightful)

Fishchip (1203964) | about 6 months ago | (#46209555)

Right up until the end when GLOBAL WARMING.

Re:That was very interesting... (2)

T.E.D. (34228) | about 6 months ago | (#46209807)

Actually, IMHO the GW stuff at the end is the most interesting part. What happens to the Winter Olympics when ice and snow become rare things? Not only is finding sites going to be tough, but also finding participants.

Re:That was very interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209845)

I just *love* your wizardry of accurately KNOWING THE FUTURE.

Re:That was very interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209989)

Are there any serious hypothesis out there, where snow and ice become rare things? The worst case scenarios I've heard anyone talk about, are that many formerly-snowy/icey places become less so, and some coastal cities cease becoming habitable. Both of these are work-aroundable by spending uncounted trillions of dollars to move people, either to higher elevations or closer to the poles. (Then just put that expense down as the cost of today's subsidized pollution.) But spend the money, and you'll find snow and ice again.

Are you saying you've read someone credibly suggest "Earth becomes Venus" such that even Antarctica isn't cold anymore?

It's hilarious that Russia, of all places, has a hard time finding a snowy place to host. That's just plain bullshit. They went out of their way to choose an inappropriate/expensive location. In America, we call that "job creation."

Why did they hold it there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209557)

Surely they have plenty of really cold places in the Noth of Siberia - with the added bonus that that it would be further away from the muzzy threat [reuters.com] . Why did they hold it in Sochi?

The mountains near Sochi get tons of snow... (3, Informative)

oneiron (716313) | about 6 months ago | (#46209629)

The Greater Caucasus Mountains where the Olympics are being held receive as much snowfall as any major ski resort in the US. It's just a bad year for them...sort of like Vancouver 4 years ago. I really don't understand the "subtropical" knock that everyone keeps repeating. This is a huge mountain range that gets tons of snow every year. Not considering climate change, the facilities they've built in the mountains will probably serve as a very nice ski resort after the olympics...

In Soviet Russia We Host You! (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 6 months ago | (#46209719)

In Soviet Russia We Host You!

Re:In Soviet Russia We Host You! (1)

gtirloni (1531285) | about 6 months ago | (#46209821)

Spasibo!

climatologists predict? (2, Insightful)

superwiz (655733) | about 6 months ago | (#46209813)

2080? heh. Reminds me of Disraeli saying (and I am paraphrasing) that politicians enjoy a the privilege heretofore only afforded to whores - power without responsibility. I guess climatologists, too, now. Making predictions not verifiable until after their retirement? Check.

Re:climatologists predict? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 6 months ago | (#46209979)

Making predictions not verifiable until after their retirement?

Maybe they are actually smarter than they look. ;-)

As we all know (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209921)

by 2080, we shall live in a 3D printed paradise as our children fly back and forth between the local galaxies in exotic-matter powered warp drives. Surely by 2080 the Makerbots will have snow cartridges in them?

Jamaican national bobsleigh team (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46209967)

They might just as well aim for bringing the event to Jamaica!

Sounds like Stalin-style mass industrialism (0)

swb (14022) | about 6 months ago | (#46210101)

It sounds very much like Stalin-style mass industrialism where massive resources are thrown at something to accomplish it. Usually it's done regardless of cost and almost seems to be done to demonstrate ability and capability more than the intrinsic value of what's being done.

SnowBank (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46210147)

In Russia, the snow bank breaks you!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>