Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

1 World Trade Center Becomes the Tallest Building In NYC 407

darthcamaro writes "On 9/11, terrorists took the lives of thousands of Americans — and removed a pair of icons from the New York City skyline. For the last 10+ years, The Empire State Building was the tallest building in NYC, but that changed today. 'Poking into the sky, the first column of the 100th floor of 1 World Trade Center will bring the tower to a height of 1,271 feet, making it 21 feet higher than the Empire State Building.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

1 World Trade Center Becomes the Tallest Building In NYC

Comments Filter:
  • by bigredradio ( 631970 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:21PM (#39848879) Homepage Journal
    I actually find it interesting and a feat of engineering to have such a tall building. What is up with all the trolls? Get a life you guys. This was a tragic event that should never be forgotten. If there was no mention on Slashdot I would think that someone was asleep at the wheel.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:25PM (#39848939)
    You mean, not forgetting the 3.000 people who died as opposed to the 100.000 who died in the shameless wars after? Fuck you.
  • Took way too long. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:26PM (#39848957)

    Almost 11 years to build a building. Nuts. The Empire State was built in just 2.5 years using primitive 1920s technology, and the first WTC in the same amount of time.

      I think the long dragout time is symbolic of how America has lost its ability to get things done in a quick fashion. (And why people turn to India or China or Russia instead.) Too much bureaucracy and second-guessing and twiddling of thumbs.

  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:31PM (#39849039)

    Yep. Should have just dusted-off the old WTC schematic, made a few tweaks to modernize the internal skeleton, and then rebuild the whole damn thing again. Plus add a temporary middle finger to the top, aimed towards Mecca.

    "You destroy it; we'll rebuild it. You destroy it again; we'll rebuild it again. And again and again." Just like the Senate and People of Rome. They lost 3 navies before finally crushing Carthage. They refused to give up.

  • by AlienIntelligence ( 1184493 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:32PM (#39849053)

    If it's not habitable, it's not a building, per se, ie, it's not "the tallest building in NYC".

    Maybe the tallest non-supported construct. Tallest building is many months off.

    NOT news for nerds btw. I've been doing drafting and architecture for over 20 years,
    this is just NEWS. If we start 'building out' the definition of nerd... we're are just going
    to have to call this a "news site". You can't say there are "nerds" in every occupation,
    where are the molecular gastronomists? That's nerdy. Where are all my tuner nerds?
    THIS version of nerds, means, from the very beginning, techy, electronic driven NERDS.

    And it won't work to call this just a news site, cause news, is usually news on the first day.
    Not 4 days later, a week later, a month later.

    It'll happen soon, probably this year. Readership will decline pretty hard. Slashdot
    has not in months, nee well over a year, surprised me with a fresh story that I didn't
    catch somewhere else, ON THE DAY IT HAPPENED. Without a retool, this is probably
    my last year reading Slashdot.


  • by i kan reed ( 749298 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:36PM (#39849093) Homepage Journal

    I actually don't understand the importance of not forgetting. It seems like a nice enough thing to say, but I want a genuine justification for why it should be remembered, as opposed to mourned and then moved past? I know this sounds incredibly cynical, but I think the United States penchant for remembering tragedies and not achievements is unhealthy for the national psyche in the long run.

  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:37PM (#39849117) Journal

    This was a tragic event that should never be forgotten

    You're absolutely right. The failure of our government to rebuild immediately after 9/11 was a tragic event that should never be forgotten. The new WTC tower is symbolic of nothing more than America's decline.

  • by l0ungeb0y ( 442022 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:39PM (#39849141) Homepage Journal

    Why shouldn't this be forgotten?
    I think it's high time we got over it.

    I also think it's high time we got rid of the Patriot Act and the TSA
    -- Like that would ever happen --

    So go ahead shrieking "9/11 NEVER FORGET!" To remind us how we let the terrorists win.
    Because they did.

    Try not to feel like a criminal the next time you undress yourself at the airport while waiting in line to get your nads zapped with a healthy dose of radiation.

  • Re:Typical (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Merk42 ( 1906718 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:42PM (#39849177)
    GP is referring to people that may not have been American citizens but were there working or on vacation who unfortunately died that day.
  • by Galestar ( 1473827 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:43PM (#39849195) Homepage
    Why is this marked troll? U.S used 9/11 to justify the murder of far more innocent civilians. It is atrocities committed by Americans around the world that need never be forgotten.
  • by TheCarp ( 96830 ) <sjc@carpane3.14t.net minus pi> on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:44PM (#39849199) Homepage

    Yes being 21 feet taller than the tallest building in that city must have added so many huge technical challenges. Sure its impressive, but this isn't about impressive technical challenfes, its a nationalist hooray for us. Its drivel.

    9/11 was a tragic event, but never forgotten? Why? what does remembering it teach us? I don't see any important lesson in it. Bad shit happens? Sometimes a few dedicated people will fuck shit up for other people?

    Much more to remember is peoples terrible overreactions which continue to this very day. 9/11 was pretty forgetable compared to the backlash it caused. Compared to the massive expansion of govenrment securituy apparatus, compared to the exercises in airport security theater? Meh, 9/11 itself was just a few guys bringing some buildings down and killing a bunch of people.

    There really isn't very much impressive about it, it wasn't even a repeatable strategy, as before the day was out. The ONLY reason it worked in the first place was because passengers were expecting a normal "hostage situation" hijacking, where it made sense to stay in their seats and wait for the situation to be resolved. By the end of the day the whole plan was useless to try again.

  • by gman003 ( 1693318 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:46PM (#39849217)

    There's a difference between "remembering" and "obsessing over".

    We still "remember" Pearl Harbor. We still "remember" the Alamo. We still "remember" the Boston Massacre. But I'm pretty sure very few people are still angry at Japan/Mexico/Britain, and I'm pretty sure we're not going to use them as casus belli anytime soon.

    Britain still "remembers" the Gunpowder Plot. France still remembers the Bastille. Both of those events are centuries in the past, yet they are still worth *remembering*.

    There's nothing wrong with *remembering* that these things happened. There *is* a problem with obsessing over it and continuing to use it as justification for everything from invasions to the TSA. For example.

    PS: We *do* remember achievements (the Apollo program, etc), even some we didn't really accomplish (who single-handedly beat the Nazis? We did!).

  • by WillAdams ( 45638 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:47PM (#39849241) Homepage

    an AC asked:

    >Wasn't military spending one of the causes of the collapse of the Roman Empire?

    It was a lack of military spending and an inability to adapt their military to cope w/ changes in military technology (the development of the composite bow by the horsemen of Central Asia) which resulted in the downfall of the Roman Empire, that and dry-rot from w/in due to a dis-affected population (a huge majority of which were slaves) which wearied of being manipulated so as to make the wealthy and powerful, wealthier and more powerful (seem familiar).


  • by bigredradio ( 631970 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:55PM (#39849363) Homepage Journal
    You make a good point. How many people know the political and economic decisions that led to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? When I say we should not forget, I speak generically about not forgetting the past for fears of repetition. We should remember 9/11 in my OPINION as a combination of how building should be built, safety concerns with first responders, our governments (US) habit of arming and propping up power-hungry leaders to play political chess with our enemies. There is an awful lot we can learn from history. I think it is short sighted to just look to the future without learning from the past (mistakes or achievements).
  • by Baloroth ( 2370816 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:56PM (#39849381)

    Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

    --George Santayana

    That is why. Also, I don't know what history books you read, but the US history books I studied included the achievements too. They just aren't brought up as often (and usually are associated with tragedies, since those are the times when achievements become the most significant).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:57PM (#39849391)

    It seemed to be barely moving for months but this spring they must have really picked it up a notch because suddenly it's been growing fast! To me the old WTC is so reminiscent of the dotcom days. I had just moved to NYC and was for a small tech firm. Always loved perusing the O'reilly books at the WTC Borders on some down time. Nice to see them finally bringing it back, definitely gives me some optimism even if the USA and the world will never be the same again. But better or worse I'm packing up and heading to the west coast next year anyways. If you're not working in finance or maybe some wing of the entertainment industry there's nothing for you in New York anymore. All that crap about "Silicon Alley" is just hype. The only people hiring are hedge funds who want some kind of shady derivative algorithms coded up...but anyways, at least the WTC is back in one form or another.

  • Re:Support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @03:58PM (#39849415)

    Many of those 10,000 supported the demise of the 3k, so I'm just fine with that.

    The perpetrators were mainly Saudi, they trained in Afghanistan and the US public links all this with the war in Iraq - where a shitload of innocent people died, probably all of whom had nothing to do with 9/11. And even in Afghanistan a bucketload of innocent people died.
      Iraq body count [iraqbodycount.org]
      Civilian Casualties in Afghanistan [wikipedia.org]
    But I can't seem to find a link for a war in Saudi Arabia, or the number of civilian deaths there.

  • by localman57 ( 1340533 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:04PM (#39849509)
    How flawed could the building have been? The blew up a bomb in the basement, and it kept standing. They flew a fully fueled 747 into each tower resulting in a couple of the biggest fires New York had seen in over a Century, and the damn things stayed up long enough for nearly everybody to get out. I'll hire that architect.
  • Re:Support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ifiwereasculptor ( 1870574 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:09PM (#39849589)

    Many of those 10,000 supported the demise of the 3k, so I'm just fine with that.

    That's a morally problematic stance to take. First of all, what's "many of those 10.000"? 1.000? 5.000? Let's say 5.000 for the sake of avoiding harder math. Ok, so the next step would be to take you and 16.665 like-minded individuals (plus a midget), put them in a group with 16.666 random people (plus a midget) and kill the whole group.

    And I think the bluntness of the AC didn't really convey what I find to be a valid point: you should remember the ramifications. The most important lesson to learn, here, is that 9/11 didn't end with the building coming down. It resulted in much more people (including a lot of non-combatants) getting killed in two wars, an enourmous economic crisis, creation of the Patriot Act and the TSA etc. The reaction to the event was arguably worse than the attack itself, and if people forget about that and only think "honor our 3.000 and fuck the terrists", they are only fostering the kind of exploitable us v. them mentality that led to this political and economic nightmare to begin with.

  • Re:Support (Score:4, Insightful)

    by r1348 ( 2567295 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:10PM (#39849599)

    It's 100.000, not 10.000, and it's still a very conservative estimate of the casualties of the American wars in the last decade.

    The notion that "many of those 100.000" supported the events of 9/11 is plain ridiculous, particularly if you consider the average demographics of the war casualties (unharmed civilians from underdeveloped countries). Also, I would like to remind you that collective punishment is banned by the Geneve Treaty.

    Still, nowadays world is much less safe and stable than 10 years ago, and Americans got robbed of a much deserved peace dividend that would have turned the US into a prosperous peaceful country.
    But you got just another big skyscraper so Go America, I guess.

  • by Bill_the_Engineer ( 772575 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:12PM (#39849641)

    This was a tragic event that should never be forgotten.

    Yet April 19th came and went without a mention. On April 19, 1995, the Alfred P. Murrah Building was destroyed when 4 American terrorists exploded a cargo van full of explosives. 169 people died including 19 children under the age of 6 and over 680 people were injured.

    People said we shouldn't forget the Oklahoma City bombing... yet we did...

  • by Oxford_Comma_Lover ( 1679530 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:15PM (#39849669)

    Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

      --George Santayana

    That is why. Also, I don't know what history books you read, but the US history books I studied included the achievements too. They just aren't brought up as often (and usually are associated with tragedies, since those are the times when achievements become the most significant).

    But leave out the things that cast the U.S. to unfavorably, unless it is politically correct to do so (as with slavery). For example, the British burned the White House, but you'll rarely see a word in U.S. history books about the U.S. burning the houses of parliament in Canada first.

  • by DigiShaman ( 671371 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:23PM (#39849797) Homepage

    Amen to that!

    The WTC towers should have been built in the exact same place better and possibly taller. We're a bunch of pussies in this regards. Instead of building the ultimate "fuck you" to them, we instead snivel in a corner and build a bunch of memorials. I'm sorry, but it's not worth all that for 3,000 people. Etch their names in stone someplace else. On the outside, a wall, or insides someplace. But there's no reason to create nothing short of a shrine that only symbolizes cowardice!

  • by JosephTX ( 2521572 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @04:56PM (#39850207)

    Yes, "collateral damage" and "accidental casualties" caused by a government-sponsored "war" launched for the sake of exerting control over recently-socialized oil pipelines are indeed murder. So is re-electing someone after they've started that "war."

  • by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @05:01PM (#39850259) Homepage Journal

    You kill 3,000 of ours, we'll kill 100,000 of yours.

    When did we kill 100,000 Saudis?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, 2012 @05:07PM (#39850323)

    Hi there. You're an idiot.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, 2012 @05:16PM (#39850381)

    Did you see the interview with the architect?

    He looked like his kids had been killed, and I suppose they were. He was talking about how it was actually designed to withstand the impact of a 707, which was the biggest plane at the time. Building it to withstand a 747 would have been the equivalent of designing to withstand the impact of the Space Shuttle.

    I did see that, and I thought he got the raw end of the deal.

    It was designed to withstand a fully fueled 707 at 250 knots speed (maximum legal speed under 10,000 feet). This accounts for accident scenarios, airplane lost in fog, etc. Design request was partly due to a B-25 Mitchell bomber that actually hit the Empire State Building in similar conditions, impaled itself in the building.

    It actually withstood the impact of a fully fueled 767 at over 300 knots speed (maximum ramming speed). It remained standing for several hours.
    Neither tower toppled over immediately after impact.
    In both towers, people below the impact point were able to exit, and rescue workers were able to enter and try to evacuate the injured.
    Had there been enough helicopter support, it might have been possible to extract some of the people above the impact point.
    It was not able to withstand the impact plus the fire, including failure of the fire pipes and the division of fire personnel between multiple damaged buildings.

    Had it been an accidental impact from a cargo 707 in the fog, I doubt that the stricken tower would have been left unscathed, needing only paint, windows and new carpeting. It would have taken a partial to complete rebuild of that damaged tower, and there would undoubtedly have been deaths / entrapment for occupants.

    In short, show me a building that can take the impact of a modern airliner without being completely obliterated immediately. Then show me one that is still standing after being on fire for several hours. I think the original WTC did a great job of staying upright as long as it did. A design failure would have been the top third landing on the street, while the people were still figuring out which way to run.

    In fact, thinking back, the building's foundation was strong enough to withstand a truck bomb in a van, several years prior. So I personally think the designer got it right, it's just that the terrorists raised the stakes higher than ever imagined.

  • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojoNO@SPAMworld3.net> on Monday April 30, 2012 @05:16PM (#39850387) Homepage Journal

    This was the master stroke by a group of madmen who wish to murder civilians in the name of god.

    No! They are not attacking you "in the name of God", they are attacking you because you attacked them first. Decades of messing with Muslim countries and killing Muslims lead to the current situation. Don't try to characterize them as insane or freedom hating. Yes, religion is used to encourage and justify war and murder, but their hatred of the US and everyone else who messed with them is rational.

  • Re:Support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IgnoramusMaximus ( 692000 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @06:31PM (#39851415)

    For everyone 1 person that hates the US there's 5 that wish we'd come in and fix whatever crap is going on in their community.

    This is a perfect example of the root cause of everything that is wrong with the USA: supremely arrogant, utterly self-deluded, smugly imbecillic and profoundly ignorant feeling of the Universe revolving around your ass.

    From what I've seen traveling around the world (something that I am sure you did not deem necessary to form your opinion) is that if anything, your numbers are actually reversed: for every naive goofus who sees USA as a potential saviour, 5 see it for what it is: a self-important empire whose distinguishing feature is hypocritical pontification about "freedom" and "democracy" while depriving anyone who has something it wants of freedom, property and frequently life all the while propping up convenient dictators and absolute monarchs (see also: Saudi Arabia) all over the world.

    And your general attitude just illustrates the point gloriously.

    America isn't perfect but we're the best hope for the World and everyone knows it, that's why they loan us money until they're starving because they know if there's ever a problem we're the ones they can call.

    Comedy gold. What was the last time anyone other than thieves and would-be robber barons hoping to profit from misery of their fellows actually asked you to show up and blow their country to smithereens in the name of "saving" it?

    Or were you trying to be sarcastic by pointing out how USA rigged the world financial markets for its own benefit? Or more precisely for the benefit of its top 1%, who - amusingly enough - are these days busy abandoning what they sense is soon to be a rotting corpse of a has-been empire for some greener pastures...

  • Re:Not true (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Stan92057 ( 737634 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @07:01PM (#39851709)
    Thats because most of the terrorist came over from Afghanistan to Iraq to have the opportunity to kill Americans. And one of the reasons the War is taking so long is because we dont want to kill civilians. Hell if we did the carpet bombing like in WW2 it would have been over long ago.
  • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @08:04PM (#39852301) Homepage

    And they came to Iraq from all the surrounding countrys to get a shot at killing Americans and hide among the women and children while doing just that.

    Yes, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was justified by the presence of terrorists in Iraq in 2005.

    We would have been equally justified to invade, say, Iceland, if doing so would have convinced some terrorists to follow us there to get a shot at killing some American soldiers.


  • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @08:06PM (#39852321) Homepage

    You kill 3,000 of ours, we'll kill 100,000 of yours. Do that often enough, maybe people will learn not to fuck with us.

    It's when both sides start using this logic that things get really fun.

  • by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Monday April 30, 2012 @11:38PM (#39853941) Homepage Journal

    Well, according to wikipedia Saddam killed about a million of Iraqi's civilians during his reign.

    Hmm... well, I would say not our fault, not our problem, but... well, you know... [wikipedia.org]

    One would think our leadership would eventually learn the futility of interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations...

  • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @05:13AM (#39855073)

    "First collateral damage in a warfront is usually not considered murder."

    Yes, except we have mountains of evidence for cases where the damage wasn't collateral, and was just outright murder, or at best, manslaughter due to gross incompetence.

    "Also, 86% of the civilian casualties were from those same "innocent" civilians killing each other."

    Yeah, and I hear 99% of stats are bullshit too.

    "Considering that only 14% were actually from Americans -- in a warfront -- I would say the American military did an outstanding job of limiting civilian casualties."

    Yes, that's why the civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan were so desperate for the Americans to stay, because they'd done such an awesome job of just that.

    No seriously, American military forces are good at one thing - destruction. The fact they just can't handle hearts and minds operations and limit civilian casualties is why they've failed to achieve their objectives in most military actions they've engaged in since the second world war - from Korea, to Vietnam, to Lebanon, to Somalia, to Iraq, to Afghanistan amongst others.

    Anglo-French air strikes in Libya are an example of doing a good job of limiting civilian casualties (regardless of whether you think the action itself was justified).

    "Terrorist/Extremists planting pressure trigger bombs in the road, and along comes a civilian does not make the US Military responsible, sorry. Go troll and FUD elsewhere."

    Well, it kind of does if the whole reason that IED is in the road in the first place is because they were trying to get Americans the fuck out of the country.

Someday somebody has got to decide whether the typewriter is the machine, or the person who operates it.