4 ms·
I don't follow your analogy. How is this to the train what the plane was to an oceanic voyage?
by aqme28 6y ago
I don't follow your analogy. How is this to the train what the plane was to an oceanic voyage?
- nickff 6y agoI don't really have a direct analogy (possibly due to a lack of 'vision'); I just think that changing technology can create 'paradigm shifts' in access and capabilities.
- smogcutter 6y agoIt would be a better analogy if the changing technology weren’t “it’s like a train except for fewer people and also it costs more”.
- nickff 6y agoWell, an alternative view is that "it's an airplane but more efficient and with lower operating costs". Everything from bicycles to commercial aviation is on the spectrum of people-movers (with alternative uses as well).
- bigbubba 6y agoI don't think comparisons to airplanes make much sense. While early airplanes may have only been accessible to the rich, at the same time the infrastructure required was very minimal. During the early stages of the aviation industry, not much more was needed than a field or lake. A minimally viable Hyperloop for the rich requires billions of dollars of infrastructure.
- nickff 6y agoI agree that these comparisons are not direct analogies, which is why I said "I don't really have a direct analogy (possibly due to a lack of 'vision')".
- bassman9000 6y agoMost people won't take a train to do Austin-NY, or LA-Seattle. With the hyperloop, the rich people would at first. Once scaled, everyone would. Plane can't beat downtown-to-downtown.