Sign into an existing account

That scenario is as real as flat earth. California faults are slip faults, meaning the two sides slide past each other horizontally. No 'falling into the ocean' possible. Faults that experience a lot of small quakes are ideal, as that means they're moving along under small pressures, resulting in many small quakes instead of a "big one".

It's not an exact science yet, but the Hayward Fault under the heavily urban (and ethnic) east side of the SF bay is the place to watch.

"Scientists have studied the faults extensively and determined that the Hayward is probably the most dangerous. It has a 31.7% chance of rupturing in a 6.7 magnitude earthquake or greater in the next 26 years, and the Bay Area has a 63% chance of having at least a magnitude 6.7 earthquake in the same time period."

It's a major fault that's not having all these small quakes as it inches along, but has been stuck for quite a while. Once the pressure finally overcomes the friction that has it locked in place, look for the SF bay area to get significantly wrecked.

https://seismo.berkeley.edu/hayward/

Fly over the Hayward Fault and see how close you are to it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU2yd1-uy80

https://www.eeri.org/site/images/lfe/pdf/hayward_fault_scenario.pdf

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-hayward-fault-20180417-htmlstory.html

The cool thing about earthquakes, in a natural disaster sense, is that unlike hurricanes and tornadoes, they occur in known locations at fairly 'predictable' intervals of many years. So in this case, living in the east bay carries risk, as does investing in tech companies located in the upcoming disaster zone.

Took over 30 years in my town for all the destroyed buildings to be replaced.