this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2022
16 points (90.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43851 readers
1295 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
With Elon, it's easy to give examples, because he could brush his teeth and will claim it's going to revolutionize everything.
The hyperloop proposed 10 years ago was supposed to revolutionize transportation and get you between SF and LA in an hour. It's totally dead in the water now.
Are you sure it's totally dead in the water?
They're still going at it but most experts have already denounced it. Just build a normal train system FFS
The top speed recorded is 288 mph and hasn't been beaten in 3 years. This isn't even faster than the fastest train at 374 mph which doesn't need vacuum tubes. Considering that hyperloop is just a fast train in a vacuum to make it go even faster, you'd expect it to at least beat trains after 10 years of work. So you tell me.
I think it's supposed to be more efficient, not just fast. I worked with a guy who helped design Maglev trains for China. With my limited knowledge, I'd think that a train floating above a track with no friction and being propelled by a magnetic wave has more potential that a train in a tube. I'm not familiar with the power and technology it takes to create that magnetic wave, but I still think it has more potential. I should have asked how the wave was created, but I was too amazed that the technology even existed.
Idk, I think any argument that hyperloop is more energy efficient goes out the window when you consider the energy costs of having to keep depressurized a 500 mile long tube.
I agree, and if it's underground, accessibility has to be considered over and above pressurization. It's more suitable for freight transport than it is moving people. It has to be earthquake-proof in some regions. Logistically, I don't think it's a good idea. It's fun in concept because it makes us think we're stepping into the future, but there are better visions for our future than a pressurized tube.
The hyperloop is odd actually. Musk didn't actually want to do it, he just tweeted out some random thing as a reaction to the price of California's high speed rail proposal, but at that point his fanbase was used to him just doing crazy things so they piled on him. That's why he set up that competition, to see if it was viable.
Source: his biography
Besides, that it doesn't matter if musk just claims something, anyone can claim something. Anything he's gotten behind has succeeded.
He didn't just passively tweet about it, he wrote a white paper, built a test track costing no less than $37 million, sponsored competitions from 2015-2019 for who could build the best pod, went on television interviews explaining his idea and claimed it was easy. And he has recently promised building a new test track after all of his fans moved on to doge coin and stopped caring about hyperloop. He's never claimed his fans pushed him to do this. To say "he never wanted to do it " is a dishonest and contradictory analysis.
Also, you are just moving the goalposts now. You asked me which Elon Musk idea was supposed to be big but flopped. Now you say it doesn't matter what he claimed is supposed to happen, he has to back it. Excuse me, is that what anyone believes the word "idea" means? In order for something to be an idea do you have to invest in it? And apparently investing $37 million is not enough for something to be considered an idea. You are making a fool of yourself.
I saw a nice video of the test run on the test track that our sister plant built for the Hyperloop. That was years ago and I've heard nothing since. I think Virgin is building something similar and the design seemed to be further along.
Ok, ok maybe it's not fair to say he never wanted to do it, so it's a good thing I didn't. Look there's no need to get worked up. He did say his fans pushed him to do it, in his biography. You can go read it if you want, it's probably available at a nearby library. The competition was sponsored by SpaceX and the white paper based on a previously existing concept and written mostly by other engineers. Musk just took all the credit.
I'm not trying to move the goalposts here. I'm just referring to the original question, in response to your example of musk claiming toothbrushing is revolutionary. Which I know is exaggerated obviously, but my point is that musk claiming something does not make it the next big thing. Musk may claim lots of things but the ideas he actually believes in enough to personally work on have succeeded.*
*At least so far. Personally I think the boring company thing is going to be a total flop, but it's too early to say for sure.
Yet you say "Musk didnβt actually want to do it" in the message I replied to.
Like Twitter.
Musk didn't own twitter when I made that comment. Twitter has revealed how bad he's gotten. I don't think my comment applies anymore.
It's easy to succeed when DARPA's taxpayer money is funding everything. Tesla would have gone bankrupt if not for taxpayer dollar keeping it afloat.
Er, well he did still succeed though and accomplish something existing car companies with billions and billions could or would not. Also, this is besides the point.
He failed miserably. Pending bankruptcy is not success. DARPA succeeded by funding him until he got a product that could make money. DARPA is the U.S. government. It's me and other taxpayers. All the money he makes now is because the government spent money cushioning his fall so that he could survive. He's just a face propped up to represent American technology.
I'm not sure what you mean, tesla is not pending bankruptcy.
They were DARPA bailed them out with taxpayer money.