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

81–90 of 255 posts

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#81

Post by Tloewald »

stale2002 wrote: post #55
ethn wrote: post #25

The problem with the Hyper-loop and Elon Musk in general, isn't that Elon Musk is wrong or that the Hyper-loop won't work. The problem is that he engages in a nepotistic political-industrial complex. That is, he subsidizes his risk for the benefit of the shareholders and himself at the expense of the taxpayer. The same tax payers who are often in a state of financial uncertainty and destitution of education. The same…

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.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#82

Post by jpalomaki »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #48
annon wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that we've lost faith in humanity's ability to improve things by taking on large, ambitious projects, even if some, even if most, will fail, saddens me every day. It doesn't prevent me from trying to make the world a better place though, and I hope nobody else was discouraged by low-quality, knee-jerk thinking like this, either. Exactly! The author pick and chose grand ideas from the past that didn’t work.…

Those were both networks built off of scaling existing technologies (the highway is as old as people, and the railway was ~40 years old at that point). It's a very different thing than entirely new tech outcompeting old and outscaling it, which is what Musk is attempting. The question is why don't we have a national high speed rail network and if that hasn't or can't work, what's Hyperloop and Boring gonna do better?

National high speed rail network sounds like something that requires a political consensus (and public money). Probably not feasible to try to build something like that as private company.

For me Elon's ideas feel more like something private company could take.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#83

Post by JKCalhoun »

DannyBee wrote: post #41

I feel like one could have written this article back in the days of Tesla and Edison. The problem Geoff bemoans - that it's not good city planning, may even be true. That is rarely the only reason why things happen or not happen though, and that's been true as long as people have had cities. While wanting "whatever is really the best, boring or not, gets done" is a great ideal, it's simply unrealistic for how the wor…

I don't know. Since I see "hyperloop" as more akin to a pipe-dream, dangling this "cool" idea in front of people is destructive if a) it never gets done (probably because it's not cost-feasible, not from alack of imagination on the part of the public) and thus b) money to fund systems that actually do work and need funding (Amtrak) get short shrift.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#84

Post by ethn »

methodin wrote: post #64
ethn wrote: post #25

The problem with the Hyper-loop and Elon Musk in general, isn't that Elon Musk is wrong or that the Hyper-loop won't work. The problem is that he engages in a nepotistic political-industrial complex. That is, he subsidizes his risk for the benefit of the shareholders and himself at the expense of the taxpayer. The same tax payers who are often in a state of financial uncertainty and destitution of education. The same…

Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say "at the expense of the taxpayer"?

Taxpayer money is being diverted from services that are in dire need presently. That money is being used to privilege Musk and company to vast commonly owned underground land. In the past, fortunately still in some cases, companies were forced to pay the government for the externalities caused by the exclusive right to common land which deprives other tax payers of the same opportunity.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#85

Post by methodin »

kome wrote: post #42

Hyperloop is such a bad idea on so many levels. Mass transportation is the future: trains, suburban trains and metros. Not cars or "mini metros for cars". Super fast trains are already there. Europe lives in the future compared to the USA.

It definitely seems problematic to put your entire foundation of travel in the hands of government or companies, though. They especially do not represent the concerns of all people. A car on the other hand is complete freedom. I would have expected to hear that driverless cars are the future since it's not contingent on an non-existent infrastructure, rather on the roads that already exist.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#86

Post by rdiddly »

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…

Transpo wonks call this "induced demand" - the component of transportation demand caused by people reacting to the availability of transportation. Every infrastructure improvement induces a certain amount of demand, including incremental ones like adding lanes to roads. It's the reason new lane additions always seem to reach a point of being congested, faster than anticipated.

In this way transportation spending is both the purported cure and the cause of congestion, and fits the definition of an addiction. See my comment from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14850885

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#87

Post by JKCalhoun »

tehabe wrote: post #46

When I look at what Elon Musk has done in recent years is, that he improved existing technologies. Imagine that Musk would build a autonomous tram or light rail system with an induction contact rail instead of an overhead line. Most of the technology exist, it just need to be combined into one train.

His ventures have also has catered to deep pockets. I'm not saying that's easy (or we could all be billionaires) but that's a fairly reliable way to make a go at a business.

Unless his hyperloop were framed as rapid-transit for the hyper-rich, it would be quite a departure for Musk to succeed in an area that benefits the "common man".

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#88

Post by vinay427 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #68
aaron-lebo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those were both networks built off of scaling existing technologies (the highway is as old as people, and the railway was ~40 years old at that point). It's a very different thing than entirely new tech outcompeting old and outscaling it, which is what Musk is attempting. The question is why don't we have a national high speed rail network and if that hasn't or can't work, what's Hyperloop and Boring gonna do better?

We don't have a national (or contintent wide) high speed rail network because North Americans by and large don't believe in community efforts and social investment (except for military). There is absolutely incredible private wealth and an incredible poverty of public wealth. And so we are beholden to private visionaries like Musk.

It's rather misleading to ignore the convenience of existing modes fo transit (cars in particular) in North America relative to other places in the world. People don't widely support rail investment because cars work well enough. There is just enough parking, inefficient but tolerable traffic, etc. As a result, a lot of people just don't see the problem with the car culture here. Given an immediate problem, they (as with anyone else) will support a solution.

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#89

Post by methodin »

ethn wrote: post #84
methodin wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say "at the expense of the taxpayer"?

Taxpayer money is being diverted from services that are in dire need presently. That money is being used to privilege Musk and company to vast commonly owned underground land. In the past, fortunately still in some cases, companies were forced to pay the government for the externalities caused by the exclusive right to common land which deprives other tax payers of the same opportunity.

Diverted through what means? Are they somehow subsidizing his ventures apart from the electric vehicle subsidy?

Re: Hypnotized by Hyperloop

#90

Post by adventured »

Tloewald wrote: post #79
adventured wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same tax payers who know if they get sick, they won't be able to pay for it. You've made a grave mistake in your appeal. The top 40% of income tax payers are paying more than 100% of the total income tax base. The people that specifically do pay a massive share of the tax base, can overwhelmingly afford great health coverage. They're why we still have the health system we have, precisely because the system work…

I think you're ignoring payroll tax and public subsidy of private sector by allowing them to hire people at below subsistence (because medicaid and food stamps are a subsidy to Walmart)

No, I'm not. Income taxes carry the extreme burden of the tax regime in the US.

The only alternative to partial subsidies for poor workers, is total subsidy (which is what happens if you try to make Walmart pay workers $20 / hour, tax payers end up paying for a total subsidy as those workers lose their jobs). That is your only choice. Highly developed nations in eg Europe also follow that exact model, despite their very advanced welfare state systems. Do you think the bottom 1/3 of workers in Britain - given how much lower Britain's median income is versus the US - are paying their full way in terms of costs via their very low incomes? No, they're being subsidized. Their healthcare and numerous other government benefits are being subsidized by richer people via taxation. The same is true in France and Germany as well, and essentially all developed nations.

The Medicaid and food stamp programs you reference (the part that are partial subsidies to Walmart), are overwhelmingly paid for by the top 1/3 in the US via taxation, just as in most developed nations. What exactly is your argument against that? You'd rather force Walmart to fire a million people courtesy of aggressive automation, by raising wages on them, just so the very well off top 1/3 aren't put in the position of having to subsidize that labor (to the benefit of Walmart shareholders, which are overwhelmingly made up of the tax payers footing that subsidy bill to begin with)?

Post reply on HN