4 ms·

Sure I mean bad (insert bad thing) things are bad. And a risk to private homes should stop a project. But I can’t find any proof that there’s a risk here. Tun

Sure I mean bad (insert bad thing) things are bad. And a risk to private homes should stop a project. But I can’t find any proof that there’s a risk here. Tunneling is really safe.

danso 8y ago
Then why is Boring declining to take part in the EIR process?
- mips_avatar 8y ago
  You’d probably have to ask Elon Musk. I also haven’t read the lawsuit so I don’t know what specifically the homeowners wanted investigated. California law basically gives veto power to any homeowner for anything, so why bother trying to be innovative there in the first place? I think the software industry only evolved there because nobody had figured out how to regulate a bit yet.
  - danso 8y ago
    California software companies are still subject to the same taxes and standard of state employment laws. California's high speed rail has been subject to the same scrutiny and legal threats. Was Boring/Musk completely ignorant of well-known past precedent and hurdles when they claimed they could build a transportation project for much cheaper? As recently as 1 month ago, Musk still thought and publicly claimed that the tunnel "opens Dec 10": https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1054164838430064640 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1054164838430064640
    - mips_avatar 8y ago
      I think Elon Musk knows that if there's something big to be gained for society the laws can be modified. For instance Tesla only worked because the Obama administration kind of bent the laws of economics by securing a huge loan to the company.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > California law basically gives veto power to any homeowner for anything No, it doesn't.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> But I can’t find any proof that there’s a risk here. Of course not, Boring pulled out rather than go through the process that would evaluate any risks. > Tunneling is really safe. Then there was no reason to avoid environmental review.

Sure I mean bad (insert bad thing) things are bad. And a risk to private homes should stop a project. But I can’t find any proof that there’s a risk here. Tunneling is really safe.

danso 8y ago

Then why is Boring declining to take part in the EIR process?

mips_avatar 8y ago
You’d probably have to ask Elon Musk. I also haven’t read the lawsuit so I don’t know what specifically the homeowners wanted investigated. California law basically gives veto power to any homeowner for anything, so why bother trying to be innovative there in the first place? I think the software industry only evolved there because nobody had figured out how to regulate a bit yet.
- danso 8y ago
  California software companies are still subject to the same taxes and standard of state employment laws. California's high speed rail has been subject to the same scrutiny and legal threats. Was Boring/Musk completely ignorant of well-known past precedent and hurdles when they claimed they could build a transportation project for much cheaper? As recently as 1 month ago, Musk still thought and publicly claimed that the tunnel "opens Dec 10": https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1054164838430064640 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1054164838430064640
  - mips_avatar 8y ago
    I think Elon Musk knows that if there's something big to be gained for society the laws can be modified. For instance Tesla only worked because the Obama administration kind of bent the laws of economics by securing a huge loan to the company.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > California law basically gives veto power to any homeowner for anything No, it doesn't.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> But I can’t find any proof that there’s a risk here. Of course not, Boring pulled out rather than go through the process that would evaluate any risks. > Tunneling is really safe. Then there was no reason to avoid environmental review.