7 ms·

I've heard some people cynically suggest that stalling public transportation projects is the true objective of the Boring Company, similar in motivation to the

by JackCh 8y ago

I've heard some people cynically suggest that stalling public transportation projects is the true objective of the Boring Company, similar in motivation to the General Motors streetcar conspiracy. But I'm pretty skeptical of this since Tesla sells luxury cars; public transit seems unlikely to threaten their business.

ComradeTaco 8y ago
I don't think Musk's goal is to destroy public transit, but things like the hyperloop have been used as a bludgeon to attack high speed rail initiatives. [1] (https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/hyperloop-development-california-high-speed-rail-delays/ https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/hyperloop-deve...)
- noobermin 8y ago
  It may not be his goal but he has certainly spoken of his dislike of public transit.
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    I agree with him. Public transport doesn't scale well, doesn't completely replace individual transport and is uncomfortable for everyone. Optimal (not the current system) individual transportation is much better.
    - majewsky 8y ago
      > Public transport doesn't scale well Much better than individual transport. Just compare the space taken up by a bus with 40 seats, with 20 individual cars (I'm generously assuming an average two persons per car). > doesn't completely replace individual transport That was never the intention of public transport. It aims to supply the majority of rides. > is uncomfortable for everyone. Aaah, I get it. You're from the US.
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        > Aaah, I get it. You're from the US. I was born in a smaller city in the Czech Republic and now I live in Prague, Czech Republic, a capital city (±2.8m people in the metro area) with advanced and well functioning public transport that I use regularly. And while today it functions well enough, it has many shortcomings, especially problems connected to more people coming into the city (the metro population has doubled over last 30 years). > That was never the intention of public transport. It aims to supply the majority of rides. Yes, and the problem is that it won't, because it doesn't scale well, because it has so few use cases for so many people and is used out of necessity, not desire. > Much better than individual transport. Just compare the space taken up by a bus with 40 seats, with 20 individual cars (I'm generously assuming an average two persons per car). I never said that I agree with the current state of things. I actually despise it. I'm in favor of a decentralized self-managed system of individual self-driving vehicles where usage of a road would cost money per time unit. Sharing rides would be encouraged and parking unused vehicles on the street would be expensive - carsharing and carpooling would be the best option. Even buses could (and most certainly would) give shared rides, solving the inefficiency you've described. The difference is that this system would be much more flexible.
        gldalmaso 8y ago
        If usage of the road cost money per time unit, the incentive for whoever is getting that money is that roads become less effective, not more. Wouldn't distance traveled be better? That way ineffective traffic engineering would lead to jams that would mean less money made.
        TomMarius 8y ago
        My idea is that no one will be getting this money, the road would be owned by an autonomous organisation and maintained automatically, thus completely eliminating the human factor. The same autonomous organisation would optimize routes, and optionally even announce free places in shared vehicles.
    - mikejb 8y ago
      Well, either you compare optimal public transport vs optimal individual transportation, or you compare current public transport vs current individual transportation. And current individual transportation doesn't scale at all. Just observe how much city space is wasted on individual transportation (e.g. large streets through cities, parking spots etc.), and how further that can grow...
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        I'm comparing optimal public transport against optimal individual transport. The problem is that it never will be a solution for everyone, and additionally, the public transport system you're imagining can be integrated into the individual transport system I'm talking about (see my other comments here) - and IMO it's better to do the more integrated, future-proof and optimal solution. Public transport as it is now can never satisfy all people, and making it optimal means moving towards more individual means of transportation. Thinking about it now, it seems like the distinction of public vs private/individual transport will become less and less important - and that's what we should encourage. Let everyone choose the best option for them - given the prerequisites I talked about in my other comment, the market could take over from there. I'm 100% positive that buses would not cease to exist, just operate more efficiently.
    - rsynnott 8y ago
      The system described in the link is limited to 2000 passengers per hour, even assuming that Musk's claim of a departure up to once per 30 seconds comes true (hint; it will not). That is less than a decent BRT route, never mind a proper underground train. This system scales far, far, far worse than modern public transport.
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        I agree, I was not talking about this specific transport system being better.
    - jcranmer 8y ago
      Public transport scales much better than private transport. The single lane for buses in the Lincoln Tunnel carries more people across the Hudson River than all the other road crossings combined. The NEC tunnels outpaces even that. A single rail line at 26 trains/hour can carry around 20-25,000 people per hour. A highway traffic line carries about 2,000 cars per hour, or 2,000 people per hour if it's SOV. Personal rapid transit systems have been demonstrated to carry about 7,000 people per hour. The only way to scale transit to highly dense areas is to minimize the amount of space each person has to themselves. SOV cars are horribly, horribly inefficient uses of space; standing-room-only subway cars are very efficient uses of space.
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        Please read the rest of my comments here. You're talking about a different idea of individual transport than me. The problem is that you can't use public transport for cargo, for disabled people, for luxury rides, etc - there are many more use cases. Another problem is time - the bigger area and the more people your bus line has to serve, the less efficient it is for your customers. There are better ideas than to minimize space (comfort AND usability) per person. E.g. optimizing your route in a way that you go from point A to point B as directly as possible, utilizing buses and shuttles on the way, taking people that need it. Bus lines are just like this, but fixed to specific pickup points, which would definitely remain existing, but the traffic around it would get optimized as well. Why? Because with growing population, there are more and more people that need to go individually because of time constraints, comfort requirementa, disability or cargo. My solution supports your approach, just extends it to all vehicles on the road.
        KJKingJ 8y ago
        > The problem is that you can't use public transport for ... for disabled people Wait what, why not? If anything, public transport is the sole means of transport for many people with disabilities. I'm not going to claim that all public transport is fully accessible to those with physical disabilities, but every new transport project fully accommodates the needs of those with disabilities, and existing ones are gradually retrofitted as they are refurbished and upgraded. To give you an example in the UK, specifically London; * All buses and trams are wheelchair accessible, with audio and visual announcements of routes and stops. * Some parts of the tube network are completely step free. All trains have audio announcements, most also have visual. A map of current accessibility can be seen at [0]. Every time a station is upgraded or refurbished, it is made step-free. * Many heavy rail stations have step-free access to the platforms, and staff can deploy a ramp to enable wheelchair users to board and alight. At some newer stations, level boarding is available. So sure, public transport today is not 100% universally accessible to those with physical disabilities, although other disabilities are better catered for. However, in the context of new public transport projects and surface public transport there's no doubt - public transport is much more accessible than other forms of transport and is an absolute lifeline for those who have either temporary or chronic disabilities. 0: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/step-free-tube-guide.pdf http://content.tfl.gov.uk/step-free-tube-guide.pdf
blocked_again 8y ago
I don't think public transportation was threat to Tesla at any point. Would families stop buying cars and prefer public transportation over their own car? Some may but the majority of them are still going to use their own cars.
- cozzyd 8y ago
  As crazy as that might sound to you, that is in fact not unusual in places with good public transit.
  - blocked_again 8y ago
    Do families with babies and young children prefer public transport over cars in these places?
    - iamnotlarry 8y ago
      yes
    - jakecopp 8y ago
      No reason why not. I see prams on public transit in Sydney all the time. Depending on the age of the children they can also take public transport on their own, so can the drunk, elderly, and disabled. (Kids are so overprotected in this age - freedom to travel on their own on bicycles or public transport is great!) These people may not be able to drive cars. No, they can't get a self-driving car trip for $1.50 yet. When they can, we won't have enough road space anyway (one 8-carriage Sydney train carries 1200 people, that's a long line of cars!) I really like what Citymapper is doing - augmenting buses with modern tech, similar to Uber Pool but coming from the other direction: https://medium.com/citymapper/good-bus-part-1-3-77d65e6f8ce3 https://medium.com/citymapper/good-bus-part-1-3-77d65e6f8ce3
    - cozzyd 8y ago
      I mean if you asked them, they might prefer a helicopter ride or a flying car, but they certainly do use buses and trains. Subway stations without elevators or escalators are not ideal for strollers though.
labster 8y ago
It's obvious that Elon Musk's true motive for the Boring Company is to build underground habitats on Mars.
- electriclove 8y ago
  The goal of making humanity multiplanetary is what drives him and is the reason for Tesla, SpaceX, Boring, and things to come.
  - croon 8y ago
    If we'll need that flamethrower in space I don't want part of it. I've seen how those movies end.
    - glenneroo 8y ago
      Have you seen how far the flamethrower shoots? I would consider it a glamorous BBQ-starter, but fairly useless in a fight against anything bigger or faster than a rabbit.
- JackCh 8y ago
  That's not obvious to me. It seems very plausible that Musk talks a lot about Mars to give himself a solid support base of science enthusiasts, many of whom work in technical fields and have salaries that make them a valuable demographic.
  - nickik 8y ago
    People imagination is sometimes beyond me. The guy is clearly a space nerd since he was a kid. He loved video games and sience like many of us. He has also spent 100s of millions of his own many to realize his dreams. But sure, its all a synic ploy to get the support of people on reddit and hacker news.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> But I'm pretty skeptical of this since Tesla sells luxury cars; public transit seems unlikely to threaten their business. Tesla has always been clear that their growth plan is to continue to move down-market from the high end to the mainstream, and they've acted in accord with that. Public transit does than that arc.
xorcist 8y ago
There's certainly a grain a truth to that cynicism, as the hyperloop has been used to try to stifle less exotic transportation projects multiple times already. Tesla has an interest in keeping the governmental investments in automobile infrastructure going strong. It's really an enormous subsidizing that's been going on since the 50s that more than anything else has shaped the way we work and live. PR plays an important role here. And even if, worst case, that's all the Hyperloop and Boring Co turns out to be, the bang for the buck will be incredible. You have to give them that. It's not a coincidence we're talking about them right now.

by JackCh 8y ago

ComradeTaco 8y ago

I don't think Musk's goal is to destroy public transit, but things like the hyperloop have been used as a bludgeon to attack high speed rail initiatives. [1] (https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/hyperloop-development-california-high-speed-rail-delays/ https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/hyperloop-deve...)

noobermin 8y ago
It may not be his goal but he has certainly spoken of his dislike of public transit.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  I agree with him. Public transport doesn't scale well, doesn't completely replace individual transport and is uncomfortable for everyone. Optimal (not the current system) individual transportation is much better.
  - majewsky 8y ago
    > Public transport doesn't scale well Much better than individual transport. Just compare the space taken up by a bus with 40 seats, with 20 individual cars (I'm generously assuming an average two persons per car). > doesn't completely replace individual transport That was never the intention of public transport. It aims to supply the majority of rides. > is uncomfortable for everyone. Aaah, I get it. You're from the US.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      > Aaah, I get it. You're from the US. I was born in a smaller city in the Czech Republic and now I live in Prague, Czech Republic, a capital city (±2.8m people in the metro area) with advanced and well functioning public transport that I use regularly. And while today it functions well enough, it has many shortcomings, especially problems connected to more people coming into the city (the metro population has doubled over last 30 years). > That was never the intention of public transport. It aims to supply the majority of rides. Yes, and the problem is that it won't, because it doesn't scale well, because it has so few use cases for so many people and is used out of necessity, not desire. > Much better than individual transport. Just compare the space taken up by a bus with 40 seats, with 20 individual cars (I'm generously assuming an average two persons per car). I never said that I agree with the current state of things. I actually despise it. I'm in favor of a decentralized self-managed system of individual self-driving vehicles where usage of a road would cost money per time unit. Sharing rides would be encouraged and parking unused vehicles on the street would be expensive - carsharing and carpooling would be the best option. Even buses could (and most certainly would) give shared rides, solving the inefficiency you've described. The difference is that this system would be much more flexible.
      - gldalmaso 8y ago
        If usage of the road cost money per time unit, the incentive for whoever is getting that money is that roads become less effective, not more. Wouldn't distance traveled be better? That way ineffective traffic engineering would lead to jams that would mean less money made.
        TomMarius 8y ago
        My idea is that no one will be getting this money, the road would be owned by an autonomous organisation and maintained automatically, thus completely eliminating the human factor. The same autonomous organisation would optimize routes, and optionally even announce free places in shared vehicles.
  - mikejb 8y ago
    Well, either you compare optimal public transport vs optimal individual transportation, or you compare current public transport vs current individual transportation. And current individual transportation doesn't scale at all. Just observe how much city space is wasted on individual transportation (e.g. large streets through cities, parking spots etc.), and how further that can grow...
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      I'm comparing optimal public transport against optimal individual transport. The problem is that it never will be a solution for everyone, and additionally, the public transport system you're imagining can be integrated into the individual transport system I'm talking about (see my other comments here) - and IMO it's better to do the more integrated, future-proof and optimal solution. Public transport as it is now can never satisfy all people, and making it optimal means moving towards more individual means of transportation. Thinking about it now, it seems like the distinction of public vs private/individual transport will become less and less important - and that's what we should encourage. Let everyone choose the best option for them - given the prerequisites I talked about in my other comment, the market could take over from there. I'm 100% positive that buses would not cease to exist, just operate more efficiently.
  - rsynnott 8y ago
    The system described in the link is limited to 2000 passengers per hour, even assuming that Musk's claim of a departure up to once per 30 seconds comes true (hint; it will not). That is less than a decent BRT route, never mind a proper underground train. This system scales far, far, far worse than modern public transport.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      I agree, I was not talking about this specific transport system being better.
  - jcranmer 8y ago
    Public transport scales much better than private transport. The single lane for buses in the Lincoln Tunnel carries more people across the Hudson River than all the other road crossings combined. The NEC tunnels outpaces even that. A single rail line at 26 trains/hour can carry around 20-25,000 people per hour. A highway traffic line carries about 2,000 cars per hour, or 2,000 people per hour if it's SOV. Personal rapid transit systems have been demonstrated to carry about 7,000 people per hour. The only way to scale transit to highly dense areas is to minimize the amount of space each person has to themselves. SOV cars are horribly, horribly inefficient uses of space; standing-room-only subway cars are very efficient uses of space.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      Please read the rest of my comments here. You're talking about a different idea of individual transport than me. The problem is that you can't use public transport for cargo, for disabled people, for luxury rides, etc - there are many more use cases. Another problem is time - the bigger area and the more people your bus line has to serve, the less efficient it is for your customers. There are better ideas than to minimize space (comfort AND usability) per person. E.g. optimizing your route in a way that you go from point A to point B as directly as possible, utilizing buses and shuttles on the way, taking people that need it. Bus lines are just like this, but fixed to specific pickup points, which would definitely remain existing, but the traffic around it would get optimized as well. Why? Because with growing population, there are more and more people that need to go individually because of time constraints, comfort requirementa, disability or cargo. My solution supports your approach, just extends it to all vehicles on the road.
      - KJKingJ 8y ago
        > The problem is that you can't use public transport for ... for disabled people Wait what, why not? If anything, public transport is the sole means of transport for many people with disabilities. I'm not going to claim that all public transport is fully accessible to those with physical disabilities, but every new transport project fully accommodates the needs of those with disabilities, and existing ones are gradually retrofitted as they are refurbished and upgraded. To give you an example in the UK, specifically London; * All buses and trams are wheelchair accessible, with audio and visual announcements of routes and stops. * Some parts of the tube network are completely step free. All trains have audio announcements, most also have visual. A map of current accessibility can be seen at [0]. Every time a station is upgraded or refurbished, it is made step-free. * Many heavy rail stations have step-free access to the platforms, and staff can deploy a ramp to enable wheelchair users to board and alight. At some newer stations, level boarding is available. So sure, public transport today is not 100% universally accessible to those with physical disabilities, although other disabilities are better catered for. However, in the context of new public transport projects and surface public transport there's no doubt - public transport is much more accessible than other forms of transport and is an absolute lifeline for those who have either temporary or chronic disabilities. 0: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/step-free-tube-guide.pdf http://content.tfl.gov.uk/step-free-tube-guide.pdf

blocked_again 8y ago

I don't think public transportation was threat to Tesla at any point. Would families stop buying cars and prefer public transportation over their own car? Some may but the majority of them are still going to use their own cars.

cozzyd 8y ago
As crazy as that might sound to you, that is in fact not unusual in places with good public transit.
- blocked_again 8y ago
  Do families with babies and young children prefer public transport over cars in these places?
  - iamnotlarry 8y ago
    yes
  - jakecopp 8y ago
    No reason why not. I see prams on public transit in Sydney all the time. Depending on the age of the children they can also take public transport on their own, so can the drunk, elderly, and disabled. (Kids are so overprotected in this age - freedom to travel on their own on bicycles or public transport is great!) These people may not be able to drive cars. No, they can't get a self-driving car trip for $1.50 yet. When they can, we won't have enough road space anyway (one 8-carriage Sydney train carries 1200 people, that's a long line of cars!) I really like what Citymapper is doing - augmenting buses with modern tech, similar to Uber Pool but coming from the other direction: https://medium.com/citymapper/good-bus-part-1-3-77d65e6f8ce3 https://medium.com/citymapper/good-bus-part-1-3-77d65e6f8ce3
  - cozzyd 8y ago
    I mean if you asked them, they might prefer a helicopter ride or a flying car, but they certainly do use buses and trains. Subway stations without elevators or escalators are not ideal for strollers though.

labster 8y ago

It's obvious that Elon Musk's true motive for the Boring Company is to build underground habitats on Mars.

electriclove 8y ago
The goal of making humanity multiplanetary is what drives him and is the reason for Tesla, SpaceX, Boring, and things to come.
- croon 8y ago
  If we'll need that flamethrower in space I don't want part of it. I've seen how those movies end.
  - glenneroo 8y ago
    Have you seen how far the flamethrower shoots? I would consider it a glamorous BBQ-starter, but fairly useless in a fight against anything bigger or faster than a rabbit.
JackCh 8y ago
That's not obvious to me. It seems very plausible that Musk talks a lot about Mars to give himself a solid support base of science enthusiasts, many of whom work in technical fields and have salaries that make them a valuable demographic.
- nickik 8y ago
  People imagination is sometimes beyond me. The guy is clearly a space nerd since he was a kid. He loved video games and sience like many of us. He has also spent 100s of millions of his own many to realize his dreams. But sure, its all a synic ploy to get the support of people on reddit and hacker news.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> But I'm pretty skeptical of this since Tesla sells luxury cars; public transit seems unlikely to threaten their business. Tesla has always been clear that their growth plan is to continue to move down-market from the high end to the mainstream, and they've acted in accord with that. Public transit does than that arc.

xorcist 8y ago

There's certainly a grain a truth to that cynicism, as the hyperloop has been used to try to stifle less exotic transportation projects multiple times already. Tesla has an interest in keeping the governmental investments in automobile infrastructure going strong. It's really an enormous subsidizing that's been going on since the 50s that more than anything else has shaped the way we work and live. PR plays an important role here. And even if, worst case, that's all the Hyperloop and Boring Co turns out to be, the bang for the buck will be incredible. You have to give them that. It's not a coincidence we're talking about them right now.