721–730 of 800 posts
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the main disadvantage is that it takes an hour, comes once an hour, has inaccurate timetables, costs 13$, and stops running at midnight. Hence why I drive from mountain view to San Francisco rather than bother with Caltrain.
It's too bad Caltrain electrification is getting screwed over... But it's even worse that BART was blocked from just going down the peninsula, to the point that we literally went the other way around the bay to get it down to San Jose. Criminally dumb.
Same for the North Bay (original plans had the BART go almost all the way from Petaluma to Gilroy).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue with Tokyo is that the density supports metro expansions.
Per distance costs should be theoretically comparable? (Regulation costs and labor coming to mind as drivers of cost differences)
So I suppose my above was wrong. I'd guess the more reliable enablers are only sufficient density, coupled with good geology and a cooperating regulatory / permitting structure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you remove the "they" by fully automating the system.
People also tend to object to "move fast and break things" when they, and their very expensive buildings, are on top of said things and get broken as a result.
Not sure what the geology of San Francisco / California tends to be like, but I believe most of the Manhattan skyscrapers are anchored down to the bedrock. Which I'd expect would require cutting and reinforcing vs just "drill on through".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you remove the "they" by fully automating the system.
Ultimately you want to put passengers in the tunnel, yes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cheaper? A nuclear machine that melts rock and probably doesn't exist? I'm not convinced that the video you linked on sheepletv above the "underground alien bases" one is the most reliable info.
Sure, ridiculing such information is easy, especially when you describe it as you have, emphasizing the easiest targets for ridicule. If your intent was to ridicule the information, I get your comment makes sense. But, IMHO, that's not a very substantive contribution for HN. IMHO, it would have been more worthwhile to highlight the less-easy-to-ridicule aspects of the page, such as the quotes from, and discussion abo…
* Several videos about Pizzagate (and I don't mean critical examinations, either)
* A number of anti-Semitic images ("Jews control the banks", etc)
* A video literally titled "Hitler Survived WWII & Occult Nazi Scientists Developed VRIL Haunebu Foo-Craft (UFO’s) at Secret Antarctic Base-211"
* Another video literally titled "Illuminati Hip Hop Blood Sacrifices Exposed"
* A video about how Christmas is a "Satanic Illuminati Holiday"
* And this video
It's not a great stretch to say that their description of a "nuclear tunnel boring machine" is every bit as absurd and untrue as the other videos they distribute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
I wonder why it's so expensive. I agree with musk. It makes sense for humans to have a 3d transport system rather than 2d. The payoff is huge. Moving 200mph through tunnels is the future we should be aiming for. I also get a feeling he's read "foundation" from Isaac Asimov which talks about this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
What a terrible video. "I can't imagine anybody can make this work, so it is absolutely impossible"
Did you miss the bit where he never at all claimed it was 'impossible', only that it was bullshit that it would be doable within two orders of magnitude of the claimed price, with the claimed speed advantages, or with any acceptable amount of safety?
What a terrible misrepresentation of the video.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By the time a significant tunnel boring project gets planned, approved and built, cars will be self driving and the Uber model of rides on demand will be extremely prevalent. Traffic will be massively reduced and existing roads will be much more efficiently used. I agree with the theory that Musk is aiming these boring machines at Mars. That makes more sense than using them to attack the traffic problem when that pro…
I doubt very much that even self driving cars will solve LA's traffic problem by themselves. The sheer volume of people is so large, that mass transit will probably still be needed.
But self-driving cars will enable a sort of ad-hoc, on demand carpooling style 'mass' transit: something like ten-passenger vans that deliver commuters from similar downtown areas to similar home neighborhoods. If only ten percent of commuters switched to that method, taking ten cars off the road and replacing it with one van, the volume of traffic drops immediately to 91% of what it was. That alone, plus significantly smarter, denser, more efficient, networked AI driving, will hugely reduce gridlock.
And at some point as more jobs get automated, and the jobs that remain human-accessible become more knowledge-based and less presence- and specific time-based, we'll move away from the huge spikes in traffic at 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., spreading traffic volumes more evenly out across the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does everyone lack imagination on this topic? Problem: if you drive to the subway, then take the subway, then you have two problems: where do you park your car, and how do you get to your destination once you get off the subway if it's not walking distance? Currently - people just drive. And the surface streets get progressively more crowded. We could drill more regular roadways - but it's notable that one reason…
The two problems you discuss are both easier to solve than LONG DISTANCE BORED TUNNELS. Solution for problem 1: Park and Ride. Giant multi story parking lots. Cheaper to build even underground than the tunnel Solution for problem 2: Local transit like Tram, bus, or bikeshare.