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!

Taipei 101 Now World's Tallest Building

michael posted about 11 years ago | from the spires-are-cheating dept.

News 401

mstamat writes "A 101-storey skyscraper in Taipei is from today the world's tallest building. The new scyscraper is 508 metres (1,667 feet) tall, beating the 452-metre (1,483-feet) twin Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur. The full height was achieved after adding a 60-metre (197-ft) spire on top of the building. The story is on Reuters." There's plenty of information about the building available.

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

What was the largest before this one? (-1, Redundant)

fucksl4shd0t (630000) | about 11 years ago | (#7247208)

What was the talled building before this one?

Also, any odds on how long it'll be before they're flying helicopters around this and shooting at giant primates clutching big-breasted and scantily-clad women?

oh yeah, and first post.

Re:What was the largest before this one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247211)

Read the summary?

"The new scyscraper is 508 metres (1,667 feet) tall, beating the 452-metre (1,483-feet) twin Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur."

Re:What was the largest before this one? (1)

recursiv (324497) | about 11 years ago | (#7247214)

are you naturally that much of an idiot or do you have to try?

October 25th, 2003! (-1, Offtopic)

EyesOfNostradamus (75825) | about 11 years ago | (#7247272)

Now, don't you dare to mod this as offtopic!

Re:What was the largest before this one? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247401)

CN Tower, Toronto Canada. The CN Tower is 553.33 m (1,815 ft, 5 inches) tall

Re:What was the largest before this one? (1)

keesh (202812) | about 11 years ago | (#7247248)

Please don't reproduce. Oh wait, no danger of that...

Re:What was the largest before this one? (1)

EyesOfNostradamus (75825) | about 11 years ago | (#7247286)

What was the talled building before this one?

The Petronas Towers [t-online.de] in Kuala Lumpur. The reason why they held that title for so long is that Malaysia is a Muslim country...

Also, any odds on how long it'll be before they're flying helicopters around this

Around?

Re:What was the largest before this one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247333)

You really are a twat, aren't you.

Re:What was the largest before this one? (0)

asramchusak (652686) | about 11 years ago | (#7247404)

I find your blatantly Islamophobic attitude to be disgusting, and unworthy of a science and technology oriented news site.

FIRST POST (-1, Redundant)

Musc (10581) | about 11 years ago | (#7247209)

Dude, I couldn't pass up the chance
to have the first post ever!
I mean...> DUUUDE DUDE

Adding a spike to the top... (5, Funny)

aiyo (653781) | about 11 years ago | (#7247210)

..is like sticking a toothpick on my dick to gain that extra two inches. Not very fair huh?

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (1)

OmnipotentEntity (702752) | about 11 years ago | (#7247220)

However, everyother tallest building has done that, so it really isn't out of the ordinary...

___________

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (3, Funny)

Joel Carr (693662) | about 11 years ago | (#7247232)

..is like sticking a toothpick on my dick to gain that extra two inches. Not very fair huh?

Well I'll take your word that that is what it is like, having never done it myself. But it has to be said, it sounds extraordinarily painful. Each to his own I guess. :-P

---

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (2, Funny)

POds (241854) | about 11 years ago | (#7247252)

To whome is it unfair? You'r fellow compeditors or those who shall receive you'r wrath!?

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247277)

probably to both...you see his plan is to first tempt all the sluts out there by saying he has an 8 1/2 dick while in reality it' sonly about 6...then after he's through with them they are in such pain that they never want to have sex again. So he both A gets to have all the women that ever put out before having a $200 dollar dinner and movie date...and B makes sure his competiton never gets to have anyone he's been with.

he's a freaken genious....ouch...ahhh...excuse me while I try and shove this toothpick up my dick....OOOWWW!!!...almost got it now.....what's that about peeing blood again?

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247297)

Do you purchance distribute SPAM?

To continue the analogy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247365)

If you're willing to go to the trouble of sticking a toothpick in your dick, maybe you deserve the extra 2 inches

Re:Adding a spike to the top... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247369)

So how long is your dick now - 2.5 inches?

Hmm (1)

Sir Haxalot (693401) | about 11 years ago | (#7247212)

I don't understand why adding a pole or whatever to the top of the building means it's a bigger building. How about if they just made a really big pole, would that be the new biggest building in the world?

Re:Hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247217)

With that logic, Ill wear a huge at and get higher wages for being taller.

The rules only include spires, not poles (4, Informative)

donscarletti (569232) | about 11 years ago | (#7247265)

According to the criteria that are used to judge the height of the world's tallest buildings, only real floorspace and "architectural spires" are able to be counted in the total height. Aerials, flagpoles, lightning rods and other such utilitarian additions are not included. If that were not the case, the massive CN tower in Toronto would still be the tallest building after 30 years, with the Sears tower in Chicago coming second with it's Aerial sticking far above the top of the actual measured region.

If however architectural spires were not included in the height either, the Sears tower (excluding aerial) would be far taller than the Peronas towers (I am not sure about Taipei 101 however).

So in answer to your question, adding a pole to the top of a building doesn't make it a bigger building. To improve your buildings height you must add a spire (i.e. a real fat pole that serves no particular purpose apart from aesthetics). The rules are stupid, I know, but then again, I didn't make them up, and at least they stop people from using carbon fiber rods to cheat.

Re:The rules only include spires, not poles (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247273)

RTFA - it says Taipei 101 has surpassed the Sears Tower in that measurement.

Re:The rules only include spires, not poles (1)

kfg (145172) | about 11 years ago | (#7247383)

Well, the Eiffel Tower, once the tallest manmade structure of any kind, is nothing but architectural spire. That may have had some influence on how the "rules" developed.

Then there was that silly race between the Chrysler Building and the Empire State Building.

Yeah, ummmmmm, an airship mooring mast, that counts, doesn't it?

Things got silly, they decided to lay some basic ground rules and pretty much everybody has decided to stick to them, whether they always make sense or not.

KFG

Godzilla!!!!!! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247219)

arg, rarrrr, grrrr, slash, crash, boom.

Spires shouldn't count (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247221)

Am I the only one who thinks spires shouldn't count? I think it should be the highest floor of rentable, realistically usable office space.

Am I wrong?

Re:Spires shouldn't count (3, Funny)

POds (241854) | about 11 years ago | (#7247241)

Nope, i've thought this myself.. Its stupid.. if i wanted, and with appropriate concil approval i could put a 508 spiral on my house and then my house would be the talest building in the world...

Should be floor, but then you'r gunna run around with people saying "Technically, this" and "Technically that"... So theres no use in changing it now!

Re:Spires shouldn't count (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247354)

i could put a 508 spiral on my house and then my house would be the talest building in the world...

Great Idea! erm wait.. the CN Tower beat u to it!

Re:Spires shouldn't count (1)

OmnipotentEntity (702752) | about 11 years ago | (#7247367)

All that will lead to is someone putting one room on top of a elevator shaft and claiming the tallest building that way. People will find a way around the rules, so to make it fair they just said, "Fine we'll allow it."
Besides everyone already does it anyway for antennas and such, so there isn't much of a extra of the "I've got an antenna and you don't! Nyah!" thing going on.

___________

Scyscraper? (0, Flamebait)

MrBlue VT (245806) | about 11 years ago | (#7247222)

What the heck is a "scyscraper"? One would assume someone could at least spell the word "sky" correctly...

Re:Scyscraper? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247300)

Yeah I know scyscraper. nasty piece of work he is, I'd watch out if I were you

Re:Scyscraper? (1)

jeti (105266) | about 11 years ago | (#7247359)

A scyscraper is a skyscraper _without_ a spire or antenna.

Re:Scyscraper? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247396)

One would assume someone could at least spell the word "sky" correctly...
If they'd managed that, they probably would have spelled "story" wrong instead. Oh, wait...

World's tallest building? (5, Informative)

Takara (711260) | about 11 years ago | (#7247225)

I would like to note that the CN-tower in Canada at 553m is the worlds tallest free-standing building, and still is.

Re:World's tallest building? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247235)

The difference is that CN-Tower is a classified as TV-Tower since they aren't offices and such.

Re:World's tallest building? (2, Interesting)

Takara (711260) | about 11 years ago | (#7247254)

It's definatly not an office, but its still a building. It has elevators, resturants, and entertainment areas. I would love to argue semantics, but it just always pains me to hear people proclaim their building the worlds tallest.
Especially when there has already been one since 1976.

Re:World's tallest building? (3, Funny)

ftvcs (629126) | about 11 years ago | (#7247339)

I always thaught the highest building was that little shack [google.com] on the mount-everest.

Re:World's tallest building? (1)

el-spectre (668104) | about 11 years ago | (#7247370)

I'm pretty sure that 300,000 ft tower Nextel built is the biggest...

Re:World's tallest building? (0)

MukiMuki (692124) | about 11 years ago | (#7247243)

Screw you all. The Sears tower is, always has been, and always will be, the biggest waste of Chicago's mone--- err, the tallest rape of resource--- the biggest metal thingy in the world!

Re:World's tallest building? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247378)

It's a structure, not a building. You can't rent office space or live in the CN tower. It's just a big honking antenna with a couple observation decks.

wow (0, Troll)

POds (241854) | about 11 years ago | (#7247226)

imagine a beowulf cluster of those!

Re:wow (0)

vanillacoke (646623) | about 11 years ago | (#7247262)

They are located on the 13th floor ;)

Re:wow (1)

Duncan3 (10537) | about 11 years ago | (#7247310)

You mean a .. city?

pretty building (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247228)

but it looks like a giant spiky dildo to me.
nah, i've building envy, here in the US we used to have cool things like the tallest building and such, but not anymore =(

makes me wonder, why taiwan? I mean, how come this building is not on a country that matters?

Re:pretty building (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247275)

here in the US we used to have cool things like the tallest building and such, but not anymore =(

You might notice that most the recent really tall towers are being built in countries that really need them, i.e. very little land to spare. Other than the obvious damper 11/9 will have put on such projects, the huge towers are extremely expensive to build.

makes me wonder, why taiwan? I mean, how come this building is not on a country that matters?

Taiwan may not be a huge political or military force, but its contribution to the world economy is fucking huge.

Re:pretty building (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247387)

Why Taiwan: because the US is no longer the center of the world. Power is shifting away from it to the Asian region. China just put a man into space, they have the tallest building, lots of jobs are flowing into the region, etc. Right now the US still holds the military advantage, but that means little since it cannot go around invading countries just because their economy is doing better than their own. Especially when said countries are the main source for the electronics the US needs to keep its show running...

Year (end) 2004 (1)

Sir Haxalot (693401) | about 11 years ago | (#7247231)

On Skyscrapers.com [skyscrapers.com] it says 'The final section of the spire was put in place October 9, 2003, thus giving Taipei 101 the official world's tallest building title.', yet at the top of the page it says: Year (end) 2004, how come?

Re:Year (end) 2004 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247338)

yet at the top of the page it says: Year (end) 2004

It just became the tallest building in the world, but it is not yet finished. Construction on the interior is probably ongoing and it isn't scheduled to be open for business until next year.

They've got the hard part out of the way, now they just need to finish installing elevators, plumbing, wiring, aircon, windows. Not to mention interior walls, painting and carpeting, etc, before the first occupants move in.

Ex-Tallest (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247237)

And remember kids, the only reason the Petronas Towers were the "tallest" in the first place is because they stuck some spires on the top just so they could claim to be the tallest building. The highest occupied floor on the Sears Tower was still some 200 feet higher than that of Petronas.

Skyscrapers (-1)

Pres. Ronald Reagan (659566) | about 11 years ago | (#7247239)

For anyone interested in skyscrapers, check this rather amazing page [skyscraperpage.com] out.

Taipei Financial Center Corporation (2, Interesting)

Sir Haxalot (693401) | about 11 years ago | (#7247240)

It appears this Corporation has been set up specifically to construct the building, but I wonder whether they will be operating it in the future?

Re:Taipei Financial Center Corporation (-1)

PoorPost Troll (697855) | about 11 years ago | (#7247384)

PoorPost Form v. 0.22

Your post has been moderated positively but that moderation must have been in jest or error. Your post sucks. Please review this form to understand the weaknesses in your post and how to produce higher quality posts in the future.

[ ] Your post was modded funny but is not really funny. This is because:

  • ( ) You post simply used M$ instead of MS
  • ( ) You went back to beating the Windows security dead horse
  • ( ) You made a tired SCO joke
  • ( ) You made an MPAA/RIAA joke
  • ( ) You made a Jon Katz joke (who?)
  • ( ) MS blowz, linux rules (or a variant)
  • ( ) You made an unoriginal joke about Slashdotting (servers turning to powder, melting, etc.)
  • ( ) Other (please comment here: )

[*] Your post is modded insightful, informative, or interesting. In fact it is none of the three. This is because:

  • ( ) You stated the obvious
  • ( ) You simply tossed out lots of five-dollar words
  • ( ) It was in response to a poorly-written post or troll
  • ( ) You copied text from a previous post that really might have been one of the three I's
  • ( ) You simply criticized Microsoft without making it funny
  • ( ) It is bloated with unnecessary technical claptrap
  • ( ) All you did was pose questions (like a stoner)
  • (*) All you did was pose questions (like a lawyer)

[ ] Your post may be rated too highly in general for the following reasons:

  • ( ) You are an asterisk who has, knowing the story's release time in advance, pounceposted to get first p0st and get modded up early
  • ( ) You are one of the editors and are getting your ass kissed
  • ( ) One of your fans has weighed in for you
  • ( ) One of the editors has blessed it with an "underrated"

[*] Additional comments:
Sir Haxalot is a cheap karma whore. Moderators, please reconsider moderating him up in the future. :)

Thanks for posting! Better luck next time! :)

(This form is currently in alpha and suggestions for its improvement are always welcome.)

Is it just me... (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 11 years ago | (#7247246)

...or is it silly to include a spire making up about 12% of the length? Ok I know they'll find "creative" ways of not making it a spire etc., but still... Antennas don't count, so why should spires? The way it is, they're practically non-working antennas. Though they can't actually use them as such, because then they'd lose the record, wouldn't they?

Kjella

Re:Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247346)

Everyone knows it doesn't count, just as everyone knows asians have small dicks; so why not let them fantasize that they have the longest?:)

Re:Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247361)

I'd rather have a small dick and large brain than a monster cock and bird brain.

THE BELL CURVE IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO DICK SIZE.

My guess is its historical. (1)

Kaotiq (450904) | about 11 years ago | (#7247397)

For much of human history the church (insert local flavour here) has been in control and in many places they had edicts that no building could be taller than the local church, mosque, temple etc. So the hight of the spire becomes a serious issue.

Just a Thought.

K

197' spire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247253)

Geez, are they gonna count the basement depth too?

anti-overshooting system? (1)

john_smith_45678 (607592) | about 11 years ago | (#7247261)

Each elevator is designed with an aerodynamic body, pressurization and emergency braking systems, and the world's first triple-stage anti-overshooting system. The cost for each elevator is over $US 2 million.

Um, what is a "triple-stage anti-overshooting system"? To keep elevators from going past target floors?

Re:anti-overshooting system? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247307)

Willy Wonka would not be amused

Re:anti-overshooting system? (1)

Timesprout (579035) | about 11 years ago | (#7247316)

Well given that the elevators travel upwards at 60kmh its probably to stop them shooting out through the roof of the building.

Re:anti-overshooting system? (2, Funny)

dcmeserve (615081) | about 11 years ago | (#7247407)

Each elevator is designed with an aerodynamic body, pressurization and emergency braking systems, and the world's first triple-stage anti-overshooting system. The cost for each elevator is over $US 2 million.
Um, what is a "triple-stage anti-overshooting system"?

It's a highly sophisticated, interactive system of three dwarves standing on one another's shoulders to reach the brake lever.

(Previous designs employed Hobbits, but they took too many lunch breaks.)

Re:anti-overshooting system? (1)

Motherfucking Shit (636021) | about 11 years ago | (#7247409)

Um, what is a "triple-stage anti-overshooting system"? To keep elevators from going past target floors?
All I want to know is, if spires are fair game, then does "the triple-stage anti-overshooting system failed, and the elevators shot through the roof and went 100 yards straight up" count towards the height of the building?

Principle of tall buildings (2, Interesting)

heironymouscoward (683461) | about 11 years ago | (#7247263)

I noticed this in downtown Brussels: tall town houses, built for the rich burghers of the early 20th century. _Tall_ houses, with first floors way too high for times without good insulation or central heating.

And interestingly, the heights of the buildings correlate with the dates of construction: the first houses on a street are modest, then each new construction adds a little to each level, just enough to appear more important without being vulgar. When the street is full, the last construction is the most impressive, it towers over the older houses.

Of course then the whole community runs out of cash and they have to live in the cold drafty boxes they built.

I detected a similar pattern in medieval castles, and this scyskraper (sic) is a good example of the same principle at work today.

Basically, it's a bunch of boys comparing penises and sticking penis-sheaths onto them to make them look longer.

Bon amusement, mes gars!

Re:Principle of tall buildings (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247301)

I'll never underestimate the ability of the over-thinking genious side of us to equate every human achievment with that of boys trying to compare their dick sizes....I suppose if women where in charge of the world we would have countries building the largest domes to see who can build the biggest...oh wait that's right women in this society don't act like they have a sex drive because it's not acceptable..in that case if women where in charge all our resources would go into building the largest and most expensive shopping malls and of course all credit cards would be required by law to be under the man's name but usable by any women he has gone out with in the past 12-24 months depending on the amount of sexual encounters during that time period....ah yes...if womeon where in charge we would finally have leagalized prostetution...or rather what we today call dating anyone that doesn't beleive in going dutch.

Re:Principle of tall buildings (1)

heironymouscoward (683461) | about 11 years ago | (#7247319)

The differences between men and women are not the results of "over thinking" but the results of a million-plus years of evolution.

Show me women who build skyscrapers.

And the penis thing is a "metaphor".

And women have a sex drive and it's just different from the male one. Acceptability has very little to do with it. Women simply aren't excited by naked bodies of the opposite sex. They get their kicks from cute outfits, complete with matching shoes and handbags. And this is not my opinion, it's what my girlfriend tells me.

So enough of the knee-jerk "society makes us act this way" bullshit. People by and large act exactly as they please and their acts are by and large a pure expression of their nature.

Re:Principle of tall buildings (1)

EyesOfNostradamus (75825) | about 11 years ago | (#7247329)

Women simply aren't excited by naked bodies of the opposite sex. They get their kicks from cute outfits, complete with matching shoes and handbags.

Hmmm, not very logical. How can women become sexually aroused by female apparel? Unless your girlfriend is lesbian, of course...

Re:Principle of tall buildings (1)

Saeger (456549) | about 11 years ago | (#7247323)

Some of them even take their bigger penis [cayuganet.org] to the grave in the form of giant obelisks. It's funny walking through a cemetery and seeing all the "ordinary" graves in contrast to the schmucks who decided to tower above everyone else even in death.

--

Ok Then... (-1, Flamebait)

Hamster Of Death (413544) | about 11 years ago | (#7247267)

How many jumbo jets strikes can it withstand?
Hopefully more than 1.
(Yes I'm going to karma hell)

Re:Ok Then... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247291)

Yes I'm going to karma hell
There is no such thing as karma hell. Bad karma just means you get reincarnated as a dung beetle or a redneck or something.

Re:Ok Then... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247314)

Hey that gives me an idea

Normal American reaction.... (1)

jakoz (696484) | about 11 years ago | (#7247269)

They most likely think of the Empire State or the (now disassembled) Twin Towers as the largest. Nitpick all you want. If it made it, it made it. At the first to break a half km, it deserves some respect.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247295)

Actually, the CN Tower in Toronto (Canada) is the tallest building on the planet - it broke half a km in the 70's.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

javiercero (518708) | about 11 years ago | (#7247296)

OK, first off the tallest usable piece of real state is found at the SEARs Tower in Chicago. This is the tallest office building without an spear both the Taipei and the Petronas towers have their tallest floor way under the tallest floor of the Sears building in Chicago.

And if your ignorant self knew anything about the rest of the world, you would know that the tallest man made structure is found in Canada.

But by all means, don't let you ignorance get in the way of showing us Americans how little you really know.

Just a hint, we are not all that stupid over here. After all we managed to put a couple of dudes on the moon, how many times has your country gone over there.... eh? So before you "show us" make sure you apply your advice to yourself first. It makes you look... how should I say it? Stupid....

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

snarkh (118018) | about 11 years ago | (#7247302)

This is the tallest office building without an spear both the Taipei and the Petronas towers have their tallest floor way under the tallest floor of the Sears building in Chicago.

True about the Petronas towers, not true about the Shanghai 101. When finished, its top floor will be around 5 meters above the roof of the Sears tower.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

Saeger (456549) | about 11 years ago | (#7247350)

Americans want the Cliff Notes version:

  • Tallest Structure. Period: Canada's CN Tower. (to be replaced by a space elevator someday.)
  • Tallest Building + Ornamental Spire: TaiPei 101 (aka: The Ugly Takeout Container building)
  • Tallest Building w/ highest usable living/office space: Sears Tower
And here's my own metric: sum (floor[n].area * height). With that you get more kudos for having a more massive building in general, like the monster known as Sky City [takenaka.co.jp] .

--

Re:Normal American reaction.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247412)

The idea of multiplying the floor area by its height is interesting but the flaw is that a squat 10 story building with gigantic floors would be bigger then a skyscraper.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

garompa (714684) | about 11 years ago | (#7247362)

After all we managed to put a couple of dudes on the moon, how many times has your country gone over there.... eh?
yet another "normal American reaction"...

we are not all that stupid over here
thank God.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

snarkh (118018) | about 11 years ago | (#7247298)

They most likely think of the Empire State or the (now disassembled) Twin Towers as the largest. Nitpick all you want. If it made it, it made it. At the first to break a half km, it deserves some respect.

What are you talking about?

The Sears tower in Chicago is far taller than either. It is only a few meters shorter than the Shanghai building if you disregard the spire and count the height of the top floor.

If you want to count the spires, however, the the CN tower in Toronto was and still is the tallest building in the world. The Ostankino tower in Moscow is only a bit shorter and is still much taller than Taipei 101.

Re:Normal American reaction.... (1)

EyesOfNostradamus (75825) | about 11 years ago | (#7247317)

If you want to count the spires, however, the the CN tower in Toronto was and still is the tallest building in the world.

A nice way of putting it. The CN tower is all spire... (apart from the two-floor technical building nears its base...).

Interestingly enough, they used to market it as the "tallest free-standing structure" rather than the "tallest building", somehow adminitting it's not really a building... However, nowadays, they do say "tallest building" [cntower.ca] .

Is this wise ? (-1, Troll)

Krapangor (533950) | about 11 years ago | (#7247284)

With bin Laden running around initiating terrorist attacks on high buildings...

Re:Is this wise ? (1)

Takara (711260) | about 11 years ago | (#7247293)

We should immediatly suspend all building projects higher than 60 meters. The risk of terrorism is just too great.

As well we need to halt all distribution of Linux since it clearly infringes on SCO's IP. The risk of law suits is just too great.

Re:Is this wise ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247321)

Maybe we should suspend all plans to go outdoors. The risk of terrorism is too great. If I were you, I'd lock all my doors and windows and never leave the house again.

Holy Cow! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247289)

SOME UGLY ASS BUILDING

Running up the stairrs of high buildings (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247292)

Barry Bonds - baseball
Marion Jones - athletics
Tom Montgomery - athletics
Zhanna Block - athletics
Reina Jacobs - athletics
Dwain Chambers - athletics
Kelli White - athletics
Kevin Toth - athletics
Michelle Collins - athletics
John Elway - football
Seattle Supersonics - basket
Michael Chang - tennis
Jim Courier - tennis
Mike Powell - athletics
Ivan Lendl - tennis
Mark Crear - athletics
Matt Biondi - swimming
Jim Ryan - athletics
Shannon Sharpe - football
Terry Kriby - football
Milos Sarcev - body builder
Henry Ellard - football
Gregg Tafralis - athletics
Mike Buncic - athletics
Jud Logan - athletics

are all great Americans, and all proud users of Balco's main product THG!!! BTW, some of these and other athletes are under suspicion for using illegal drugs in various competition.

Run up the stairs of ANY building using - THG!!!

the *actual* tallest building.. (2, Informative)

phrawzty (94423) | about 11 years ago | (#7247304)

While this is likely the world's tallest skyscraper, the tallest man made structure on the planet is the CN Tower [skyscrapers.com] in Toronto, Canada. It has been the tallest since 1975, too.

As an aside, i cannot stress how freakin cool it is to stand on the glass-bottomed lower obsevation deck, and peer down at the city nearly half a kilometre below. :)

Ahem, this depends on how you define building. (1)

mlafranc (315895) | about 11 years ago | (#7247318)

To quote [great-towers.com]
www.great-towers.com/eng/towers/torontoindex.htm :

The CN Tower opened in 1976. It is the world's tallest building and freestanding structure tower, at 1,815 feet (553 metres), it reaches more than one third of a mile into the clouds. The seven-story sky-pod features indoor and outdoor Observation Decks that include EcoDek, a new interactive environmental attraction opened in December 1994, the world's highest glass floor, at 1,122 feet (342 metres), Horizons, the world's highest bar, and 360, the world's highest 400-seat revolving restaurant. In addition, for those who want to go even higher, we have our space deck, at an altitude of 1,465 feet (447 metres). It is the world's highest public observation gallery in the world.

508 meters !> 553 meters

It's still damn tall though :)

Skyscrapers getting boring (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247330)

Building new ones doesn't cut it. Can't we bring one down again some time?

Nothing to learn? (1, Troll)

sproket99 (701890) | about 11 years ago | (#7247337)

Haven't we learned anything of World Trade Errors?

Re:Nothing to learn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247341)

What errors? 9/11 was a great show, fun to watch.

Re:Nothing to learn? (3, Funny)

Saeger (456549) | about 11 years ago | (#7247375)

Haven't we learned anything of World Trade Errors?

What? Like being too chickenshit to build taller? [drexel.edu] Lesson learned; terrorists won.

--

A bit taller, Taiwan can send people into ORBIT!!! (2, Insightful)

taweili (111177) | about 11 years ago | (#7247340)

Just a joke. Taiwan has been in race with China for years. It's interesting to see this news right after China has finished a manned space mission.

Wait for the Muslims to destroy it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247344)

Real smart, another attractive target for sandniggers who hear voices telling them to kill. Can hardly wait.

A spire (1)

PhlegmMaster (596165) | about 11 years ago | (#7247352)

So... if I add a 504m spire to the top of my house, I'll be able to beat them? Better not waste any time then...

Nose bleed tower (1)

Rod76 (705840) | about 11 years ago | (#7247355)

That thing is so big, it needs a separate weather forecast for the upper levels.

Good way of confusing terrorists (1, Funny)

jazman (9111) | about 11 years ago | (#7247368)

Change the rules to include poles et al.

Then next time OBL decides it would be cool to fly a jumbo into the worlds tallest building, he'll get there and be like "dang, it's a two storey with a 5000m flag pole!"

Earthquakes (1)

pvt_medic (715692) | about 11 years ago | (#7247380)

Taiwan, which lies on a seismically active stretch of the Pacific basin, was hit by an earthquake measuring 7.6 on the Richter scale in September 1999. The tremor killed more than 2,400 people and destroyed or damaged 50,000 buildings.

I find the best part is the high risk of earthquakes. Could you possibly try to temp murphy any more.

-People who live in glass houes should not throw stones

Spires do not a skyscraper make (2, Interesting)

shaldannon (752) | about 11 years ago | (#7247395)

Sorry, but you can tack on a radio tower and claim to have the "tallest skyscraper." IMHO, it ain't the tallest unless you're comparing height from lowest occupiable space (sub-basement) to highest occupiable space (penthouse floor). Spires are mere decoration and airplane hazards.

Taller by roof height (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247408)

Nitpick all you want, but not only is Taipei 101 taller then Petronas/Sears in overall height, it is officially taller by roof height as well. Therefore unlike the Pertronas v.s. Sears debate a few years ago, the spire debate is a moot point here.

What about a "one-in-1000-year" gale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247410)

Re: "The Taipei 101 tower is designed to absorb earthquakes above seven on the Richter scale and one-in-100-year gales."

Winds can exceed "one-in-100-year" strength, so let's hope they built-in a large safety margin.

For example English readers will remember the so-called hurricane of 1987, the worst for 280 years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/low/dates/storie s/ october/16/newsid_2533000/2533219.stm

Man in Space, Super Tall Buildings... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7247413)

These people are living completely in the last century. Building design, of the most brilliant kind, is being expressed in the form of achievements like 30 St Mary Axe [30stmaryaxe.com] .

Tall buildings are now widely accepted as nothing more than empty vessels for national vanity, inneficient, dangerous and in every way that counts, wrong.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?