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

Hypnotized by Hyperloop

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 255 posts

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#201

Post by mirimir »

deepGem wrote: post #196

The article has a taste of criticism but offers no points of criticism. Sort of a passive-aggressive play on words, which is ok just for a read, but not something that I expect from New Yorker. Comparing Hyperloop to Concorde and it's eventual demise does seem valid at a cursory level. What's key to understand is that Concorde's failure can mostly be attributed to a combination of design, safety and maintenance facto…

Yes, that's a classic style for negative reviews. The reviewer implies all sorts of bad, but makes no disputable arguments. And yes, that's not what you'd expect from NY Times (except for some book and theater reviews). But this is the New Yorker, and pretty typical for them.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#202

Post by chiefofgxbxl »

zootam wrote: post #176
jcranmer wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you build tunnels that no one can get to. Road tunnels still need to obey grade and (horizontal and vertical) curvature restrictions. For example, every story down you push a tunnel, every city block longer an access ramp needs to be. And the deeper you make tunnels, the more difficult ventilation and pumping becomes.

theoretically one could avoid vertical curvature issues by connecting the tunnels with large shafts, similar to elevators in skyscrapers.

This may slow down traffic, based on the vertical speed of the elevators and how quickly people in cars can board the elevator.

I'm not sure which one would be quicker: having a really long access ramp (long because of the tunnel's depth), or having to wait in line to board an elevator that moves quite slowly.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#203

Post by Retra »

mamon wrote: post #163
jacquesm wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but you should compare SpaceX with other space entities and Tesla with other car manufacturers. Apples to apples. Comparing Tesla or SpaceX with Google, Amazon or Microsoft is pointless, they are in completely different fields.

But the point is: both Tesla and SpaceX already had their respective fields, with established players that proved the whole thing at least possible despite being far from perfection. Google or Amazon pioneered completely new fields, something that Musk is just now trying to do with Hyperloop

How is Hyperloop a new field? It's in the same field as high-speed trains, as it competes directly with them.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#204

Post by Spooky23 »

nihonde wrote: post #199
deepGem wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard of a study recently that showed that cities in Japan that ended up getting Shinkansen stations ended up almost always shrinking, because people got used to going to Tokyo all the time and ended up just moving there. This is so counter intuitive. This is the exact opposite of suburbia. Faster and cheaper transport led to the growth of suburbs. Can the movement of people to Tokyo be attributed just to the faste…

Shinkansen isn't really priced to be a commuter rail service. Nagoya/Tokyo is roughly $90 each way.

Employers subsidize it.

Japanese salaryman employment is like civil service employment. Mediocre pay + crazy benefits.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#205

Post by Retra »

m-s wrote: post #80
mark212 wrote: post #31

This is written by someone who's never lived in LA. "Trains that run on the tracks" is a joke in a region with virtually zero effective public transport.

How about improving public transport by investing in existing technologies that work for other cities? I'd consider that a more sensible approach than pouring public funds into an experimental technology which may or may not solve LA's transportation woes in 20 years.

Has that not already been tried? And if not, why not? LA has a government and they're surely aware of the transportation problems. One would think they could just pour their funds into this sensible approach and the problem would have been fixed two decades ago. And if that's not going to happen, maybe a desperate move is warranted.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#206

Post by deepGem »

mirimir wrote: post #201
deepGem wrote: post #196

The article has a taste of criticism but offers no points of criticism. Sort of a passive-aggressive play on words, which is ok just for a read, but not something that I expect from New Yorker. Comparing Hyperloop to Concorde and it's eventual demise does seem valid at a cursory level. What's key to understand is that Concorde's failure can mostly be attributed to a combination of design, safety and maintenance facto…

Yes, that's a classic style for negative reviews. The reviewer implies all sorts of bad, but makes no disputable arguments. And yes, that's not what you'd expect from NY Times (except for some book and theater reviews). But this is the New Yorker, and pretty typical for them.

ah, thanks for pointing out. I had the Times and this article in consecutive tabs and mistook this for the times. Classic context switching issues.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#207

Post by richk449 »

mcguire wrote: post #44
solatic wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I could get to hong kong in 15 minutes, I might go there this afternoon for some dumplings. And that's a good thing, because it increases the amount of demand available to businesses. The more potential customers you have, the more product you can make to sell to that market, and the more product you can make, the better your economies of scale. The large population of New York is what allows it to offer so many…

Yes, but the point was that if you could get to Hong Kong in 15 minutes for dumplings, you couldn't get to Hong Kong in 15 minutes because everyone else was going there, too. And some of us don't live in New York because of the friction involved.

Are you arguing that nobody goes there anymore because it is too crowded?

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#208

Post by [deleted] »

jonstewart wrote: post #133
dalbasal wrote: post #18

One feature of the transport market (from a mile high view) is that demand is almost infinite. If you can get 40kms in 45 minutes, then you can live within 40 miles of work and commute in that time. If you could go 400kms, then that becomes your commuting radius. We've seen people spread this way as earlier mechanized transport was invented. IE, average commute times didn't go down because of faster transport, distan…

One feature of classical mechanics is that the world must abide by it. With transportation, the vehicle must start and stop at a speed of zero. The energy required to accelerate the vehicle to its top speed and then decelerate it to back to zero increases quadratically as the top speed increases. Another feature of classical mechanics is, of course, that Aristotelian concept of kenophobia, or horror vacui, or resinte…

[deleted]

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#209

Post by flukus »

richk449 wrote: post #207
mcguire wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the point was that if you could get to Hong Kong in 15 minutes for dumplings, you couldn't get to Hong Kong in 15 minutes because everyone else was going there, too. And some of us don't live in New York because of the friction involved.

Are you arguing that nobody goes there anymore because it is too crowded?

If you aren't too pedantic about the definition of nobody it actually makes sense though. In this case "nobody" could be 5 billion+ people not going because it's too crowded, yet there would still be large crowd.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#210

Post by [deleted] »

Tloewald wrote: post #81
stale2002 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Transportation technology massively benefits the poor more than it does the rich. The biggest expense that the working class pay is rent. If you can cut long distance commute times in half, then that means that someone who works in the city is able to save 50% or more on rent by living outside the extremely expensive city. Transportation and housing (2 sides of the same coin) is arguably the single most importan…

Explain how the Concorde (an example in the article) benefited the poor more than the rich.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN