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

Hyperloop One to shut down

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 490 posts

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#451

Post by zizee »

Qwertious wrote: post #423
zizee wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a better candidate for colonization?

The moon. It's closer, it has pre-made internal cavities, it's far easier to evacuate if something goes wrong (a catapult and a few days travel vs a rocket and months of travel). Also, we can actually get there. This Mars colony is in the realm of fantasy, when we don't have a means of getting astronauts there without dying of cosmic-ray cancer on the way. In contrast we've put a man on the moon. Multiple men. We kno…

You'll be pleased to know there are plans underway to setup a permanent moon base. I agree the moon has a lot going for it, but I think you have your finger on the scales when comparing the two.

> a catapult and a few days travel

We don't have catapult technology that would work on the moon without solving significant technological challenges. I don't think engineering challenges should hold us back (it's half the fun of these missions), but you cannot use "we don't have the tech" as an argument against mars, and handwave it away for the moon.

> The moon. It's closer, it has pre-made internal cavities,

Mars has lavatubes as well.

> we don't have a means of getting astronauts there without dying of cosmic-ray cancer on the way

People will not die of cancer of cancer in the way. It is likely there is an increased risk to developing cancer, it's not crazy. Some estimates put it at a 20% increase. Hardly a death sentence your post makes it out to be.

> Also, we can actually get there.

Energetically, Mars is not that much further away from us than the moon. It has a thin atmosphere that allows for aerobreaking, and is a useful resource once landed.

> In contrast we've put a man on the moon.

We've put a lot of robots on Mars as well. We've actually got more recent experience landing things on Mars than on the moon, especially large things.

No one is talking about landing humans on Mars without first refining a lot of technology, without being able to reliably land craft with literally tonnes of equipment.

Personally, I'm excited about both prospects, and I'm excited that SpaceX is finally developing the reusable heavy lift capability that we should have had years ago, but for whatever reason people stopped persuing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_lava_tube

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/18417/how-big-is-t...

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#452

Post by zizee »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #344
k1t wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who is not at all well versed in this area - this surprises me. Surely if there is anywhere in our solar system we have a chance of successfully colonizing, Mars is it. It seems like the obvious first step. Where would you recommend?

The upper reaches of Venus' atmosphere is the most accessible and Earth-like environment in the Solar System. That would be the obvious first step. And for second steps you'd probably want someplace that is more useful in resources, like some of Jupiter's moons. Mars is probably the last place you'd want to go.

I can only think you are trolling.

You think that a floating base in the upper reaches of the Venusian atmosphere is a good first step? No being able to make trips to the surface would limit human involvement to the floating base, so scientific exploration would be very limited. The complexity makes it much more challenging to become self sufficient.

How would you propose making a return trip? Or is it a one way mission?

As for Jupiter's moons. They are so much further away than Mars, are all much lower in gravity, and much colder temperatures than mars.

Our own moon and mars are much better candidates for humans to visit, and attempt permanent bases and perhaps colonies.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#453

Post by Veedrac »

FireBeyond wrote: post #432
Veedrac wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is manufactured.

By his biographer?

Well, more from the social media process that selects for whatever interpretation of evidence best matches the narrative they want, rather than the narrative that best matches the sum of evidence. The biography did not in fact say he did this, or even argue for it, or even evidence it. It was just the easiest source to interpret that way, and the sources where Musk said* “it doesn't have to be hyperloop, we should just do anything that is even incrementally ahead of what China and Japan are doing, rather than something that's the worst in the world” get ignored, because the actual truth is rarely viral.

*paraphrasing from memory from the last time I had this argument and found an interview from the time

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#454

Post by 1920musicman »

ianburrell wrote: post #440
1920musicman wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I don't mean reusable containers for individual items, sorry if it wasn't clear. This autonomous vehicle would drop off smaller (than itself) locked reusable metal containers, with all small packages inside. Instead of this vehicle having to deal with unloading dozens of small packages at each destination. Just a way to optimize delivery further. > sound like a miserable thing to unleash on the streets, even at n…

How many places get enough packages to need a box? Is it dropped on the street? Who is going to bring it inside? Who is going to take the packages from the boxto the locker that tenants use? Or if they use the box, how going to keep them from swiping packages? If you are going to do smaller containers, what makes sense is one that fits a standard pallet. Then it can used for deliveries between businesses. Probably do…

That's why I preempt my proposed solution by saying that many apartment buildings already have Luxer One installed. For this type of a setup, optimizing package delivery seems like the next logical step. Buildings like that already have service people who deal with various package-related tasks.

It wouldn't make as much sense to batch deliver to single-family houses, but apartments—and in some cases gated communities—could process a dropped-off container every morning.

When I look into what goes into managing an apartment building, I notice that there are many similar jobs they do regularly. E.g. taking out large containers with trash at a specific time. This could be a similar process: pick up a container, move it to Luxer One, and plug it into the system. With further Luxer One optimization, it would be possible to automate the task of scanning and notifying tenants. So the added job for humans would be just to wheel in the container, plug it into Luxer One and then take the empty container out before the next delivery.

> How many places get enough packages to need a box?

My guess is all apartment buildings (perhaps 50+ apartments).

> Finally, why automate it? The delivery services could send a van with a large box containing packages

Because we are already on this path. Why add even more congestion during the day to accommodate the rapidly expanding delivery industry, when we could batch deliver at night? I agree, that MVP could rely on human-driven vans, but ideally that would also be automated.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#455

Post by alangibson »

hex4def6 wrote: post #170
alangibson wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much respect to an innovator, but Goddard also didn't understand gravity.

How so?

He fell victim to (discovered/invented?) the pendulum rocket fallacy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket#Pendulum_rocket_falla...

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#456

Post by rvbissell »

wildrhythms wrote: post #448
beembeem wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when I found this out, I lost a lot of respect for him. All his talk of sustainability is junk when you see words like this.

It wasn't after Musk publicly went around calling a rescue worker a pedophile for disregarding his attention-seeking 'rescue submarine' concept? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk...

¿Por qué no los dos?

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#457

Post by systems_glitch »

Qwertious wrote: post #427
jazzyjackson wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a research institute in minnesota that is improving the efficiency of steam engines and manufacturing wood "biocoal" (charcoal) for fuel. https://csrail.org/

That link only works as http for me, not https. Interesting project though.

Huh, HTTPS works at home and work for me.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#458

Post by panick21_ »

chrisco255 wrote: post #382
panick21_ wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tech is actually not fine. The initial idea was that it would be a near vacume and that the sled would use air cushion to levitate. And that simply doesn't actually work. That is why all of the companies doing it switched to maglev. And we know the issues with maglev.

Mag lev works just fine in Japan: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCMaglev A partial vacuum would be trivial to achieve and you could by all means use mag lev + partial vacuum in a tube.

Oh you mean the project that has been going on for like 40 years costs 100+ billion $ and isn't operational?

Yeah works great.

I hear they are gone install on in Hoboken soon.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#459

Post by panick21_ »

klodolph wrote: post #124
panick21_ wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah sure. That why their is constant derailment.

The constant derailment is because the operators are chasing profit above safety. Make the trains as long as possible, run them as fast as possible. At some point derailment is inevitable, if you operate the trains that way.

Yes and in Europe nobody cares about money or profit. That's why there is constant derailment there too. Ohhh wait.

There are a huge amount of accidents that have to do with bad infrastructure maintenance and bad signaling.

> if you operate the trains that way.

Yes, if you have badly maintained infrastructure and you run badly maintained trains on it, its gone cause issue.

Post reply on HN