Live data from Hacker News

The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

discourseblog.com

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know right? I work hard and do well for my family, but I know there are folks who have much higher incomes and wealth and enjoy much more privileges. Some of them have earned it and some haven't. I spend zero percent of my life being upset about this. Why do so many young people in basically my same life station fret about it so very much? It seems very toddlerish, to be so upset just because you saw someone with a…

It’s not greed and looking up it’s empathy and looking down.

"Eat the rich" isn't that, no

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you mean profoundly bright future for fusion energy... i mean if we had that, we can probably have things 10x nicer than hyperloops

Four links, all about MIT's Dennis Whyte and Commonwealth Fusion Systems: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/climate/nuclear-fusion-re... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6U4wB-oYM https://cfs.energy/

i'm not saying fusion isn't gonna work, I'm saying that i believe fusion to be a much more difficult and fundamental innovation that if realized, will impact our society much more than hyperloop.

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#65
post #43
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow your analogy. How is this to the train what the plane was to an oceanic voyage?

I don't really have a direct analogy (possibly due to a lack of 'vision'); I just think that changing technology can create 'paradigm shifts' in access and capabilities.

It would be a better analogy if the changing technology weren’t “it’s like a train except for fewer people and also it costs more”.

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#66

I disagree. I think there is a profoundly bright future to be had with hyperloops, powered by a mix of solar and fusion energy. That being said, I do believe that there are a lot of challenges to resolve along the way. * how do we halt the release of methane from the arctic and prevent the death of the North Atlantic Current (NAC)? * how do we make online education even better and as close to free of cost as possible…

How does the hyperloop solve any of these problems in a better way than an already proven technology, trains.

The hyperloop can go at the speed of a plane, using very little energy. High-speed is high-throughput. Trains aren't even in the same ballpark.

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#67
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste is waste.

True, but is waste bad?

In the extreme long term, humans will have died out and everything that was ever done will turn out to have been "waste". That said, I don't feel bad about doing things that make me feel good and/or are interesting. People can do hyperloops if they want.

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#69
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really have a direct analogy (possibly due to a lack of 'vision'); I just think that changing technology can create 'paradigm shifts' in access and capabilities.

It would be a better analogy if the changing technology weren’t “it’s like a train except for fewer people and also it costs more”.

Well, an alternative view is that "it's an airplane but more efficient and with lower operating costs". Everything from bicycles to commercial aviation is on the spectrum of people-movers (with alternative uses as well).

Re: The Hyperloop’s Only Destination Is a Capitalist Hellscape

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is public money going toward this? Pretty much all the private investment in hyperloops is to get to the point of selling it for public infrastructure projects (it was originally proposed as an alternative specifically to California High Speed Rail), so, while the answer is mostly “no” in the strict present sense of “is”, it's also “yes” in the sense of the intended goal of the projects.

That just sounds like risk-free R&D, where the people's money only goes there once the idea has been proven by someone else, with no loss for the state if it goes nowhere near our interests.

Except in the real world, the “getting ready” from day one isn't just R&D but also propaganda. You counter the propaganda so it doesn't soften the ground for waste of public funds.
Post reply on HN