Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Boring Company [video]

boringcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 800 posts

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#491

Post by jaimex2 »

accountyaccount wrote: post #463
Xcelerate wrote: post #377

It's amazing to me the amount of negativity directed toward his projects and the millions of reasons people give for why they "won't work" (not necessarily on HN, but at least on general news websites). I'm starting to believe the only difference between those who start their own companies and those who don't is that the latter convinces themselves that it is impossible, never builds anything, and from their own lack…

I get what you're saying, but sometimes a bad idea is a bad idea. You can't just positive think yourself out of it.

Sure, but you can't make that call when you have no real clue what the actual idea is or have the full details.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#492

Post by lojack »

jblow wrote: post #474
lojack wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identifying risk is one of the most valuable things startups can be doing. Ignoring that risk can be one of the most detrimental things. Good entrepreneurs treat that risk as opportunity. Bad entrepreneurs are paralyzed by it. "Reasons why not" are indeed a dime a dozen, but that doesn't mean they are useless. It may be a bit annoying to have to filter through the feedback that identifies the wrong risks, but we shou…

Yeah, identifying risk is important. But thinking one can "identify risk" as some random dude posting on Hacker News, criticizing a guy with a lot of experience running cutting-edge tech companies that make stuff like cars and spaceships (ACTUAL tech, not these lame web sites that people call "tech" these days), is ... well, delusional would be a polite word for it.

Not sure I agree with you. I'd expect most of the users of this site would actually do a pretty good job identifying risks. The delusional part is probably assuming Elon Musk hasn't already thought through these risks, along with plenty more we aren't thinking of.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#493

Post by jaimex2 »

dingo_bat wrote: post #476
pnathan wrote: post #85

This is very, very wasteful compared to actual mass transit. A subway network is much more effective at delivering people. If he's looking for mega-good, Musk would do significantly better to drop a full subway network. edit: tunnelling is a broadly solved problem. It's difficult, expensive, slow, etc. But there's no engineering reason why a hole in the ground can't happen. Musk might be able to drive some significan…

> If he's looking for mega-good I doubt it. I think he's looking for the same thing as everybody else: mega profits.

why not both?

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#494

Post by bkanber »

athenot wrote: post #445

This looks really cool. However, boring through rock is the most expensive way to connect 2 places. It only makes sense if the land features or purchase value require it. Fundamentally, this is about short-circuiting the regular road network and establishing a managed packet network that can bypass congestion. Interestingly, that's also the value proposition of public transit, though it also runs into issues of cost,…

> However, boring through rock is the most expensive way to connect 2 places.

For now. I think that's the whole point of this company. Reduce cost and risk of drilling just like SpaceX's goal is to reduce cost and risk of space flight.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#495

Post by jaimex2 »

talamown wrote: post #405
Xcelerate wrote: post #377

It's amazing to me the amount of negativity directed toward his projects and the millions of reasons people give for why they "won't work" (not necessarily on HN, but at least on general news websites). I'm starting to believe the only difference between those who start their own companies and those who don't is that the latter convinces themselves that it is impossible, never builds anything, and from their own lack…

'The millions of reasons people give for why they won't work' are so important and useful not only for the development but for other possible innovations. They should be welcomed. And I think there are no causation and correlation between thinking reasons that make it impossible and starting a company.

Except most people have no idea what they are talking about beyond their obvious 2 second observations.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#497

Post by EmployedRussian »

linkregister wrote: post #365
osdiab wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not that they cannot imagine the concept of adding new lines, it's just that the costs, both monetarily and politically for doing so, are enormous in the Western world. The eminent domain, permitting, and labor issues around these things paralyzes the development of cities, especially in the United States. If you want to see ambition in infrastructure, check out China. Being a technocracy bent on havin…

> the ability to remove people from their homes for the greater good with little repercussion I think you underestimate how poorly compensated the relocated people are. Unless it's an outcome of "Weird China" reporting, which is very possible, I've seen plenty of reports of people being forced out of their houses in exchange for flats with smaller floor space and property in an inferior location. I'm not saying what…

I think you are in violent agreement with the parent post: "ability to remove people ... with little repercussion" literally means: they (authorities) can order people move, and it costs them (authorities) little or nothing at all.

It costs the moved people a great deal, but the government doesn't care.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#498

Post by jodrellblank »

darawk wrote: post #399
aaron-lebo wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: don't feel like arguing. Best of luck to Musk.

> The Hyperloop was supposed to be a revolutionary form of transport, turns out it was overblown. He didn't launch the Hyperloop, though. He explicitly said he wasn't personally going to pursue it, he was just putting the idea out there. You can't put the fact that it hasn't yet been implemented (even though there are people working on it) on him. I've seen no evidence that the concept is infeasible, or poorly though…

It is infeasible, if it's going to be vacuum, for a pile of practical and safety reasons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk

Maybe it will pivot into something not-as-originally-hyped by the same name.

Re: The Boring Company [video]

#499

Post by gregpilling »

If I recall, this whole idea started as a result of traffic on the 405 or something.

This idea is only useful if it could deliver traffic volumes at meaninful percentage of the current 405 throughput.

wikipedia says "The freeway's annual average daily traffic between exits 21 and 22 in Seal Beach reached 374,000 in 2008" .

So how many car elevators to do 10% of that? How many car elevators to move 37,000 vehicles per day? Assuming a 1 minute cycle time, that would be 25 elevators running 24/7 evenly, with no rush hour (obvious unrealistic).

I think it is a scale problem, much like 3D printers won't upset the economics of high speed injection molding anytime soon.

Post reply on HN