Slashdot Mirror


Next Big Thing From Elon Musk? It Could Be 'Boring' (usatoday.com)

A string of tweets put out by serial tech entrepreneur Elon Musk on Saturday hints that his entrepreneurial future may be a little "boring." USA Today reports: The Tesla and SpaceX founder got on Twitter on Saturday morning to rant about an issue he seems to find irksome -- traffic. Musk has also been working on resolving his frustration with traffic issues through above-ground means with his Hyperloop venture, which proposes a plan for mass-transit pods moving through above-ground tubes. But that doesn't appear to be enough, commenting: "Traffic is driving me nuts. Am going to build a tunnel boring machine and just start digging..." He even offered up a name for the venture, calling it "The Boring Company," and began branding it with a slogan: "Boring, it's what we do." Then capped it off by tweeting, "I am actually going to do this."

184 comments

  1. Tubes or Tunnels? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or both.....

    Poor guy. What he really needs is a helicopter.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    1. Re: Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will this machine be gas powered?

    2. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's probably not allowed to land one at his house.

    3. Re: Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You see this internet thing has these things called packets which are basically pods flying around a huge big mass of tubes.

    4. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor guy. What he really needs is a helicopter.

      Monorail ! and a catchy song to sell it.

    5. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Poor guy. What he really needs is a helicopter.

      A boring machine is just a beefed-up helicopter with the rotor moved to the front.

    6. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was gonna say "someone who can and does say no to him"

    7. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
      Like a genuine, bona fide
      Electrified, six-car monorail
      What'd I say?

      Monorail
      What's it called?
      Monorail
      That's right! Monorail

      Monorail
      Monorail
      Monorail

      I hear those things are awfully loud
      It glides as softly as a cloud
      Is there a chance the track could bend?
      Not on your life, my Hindu friend

      What about us brain-dead slobs?
      You'll be given cushy jobs
      Were you sent here by the Devil?
      No, good sir, I'm on the level

      The ring came off my pudding can
      Take my pen knife, my good man
      I swear it's Springfield's only choice
      Throw up your hands and raise your voice

      Monorail
      What's it called?
      Monorail
      Once again
      Monorail

      But Main Street's still all cracked and broken
      Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken

      Monorail!
      Monorail!
      Monorail!
      Monorail!

    8. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      The idea of a copter is great until you get to the 2 to 4 hours of maintenance for each flight hour.
      Then there's the glide ratio being roughly the same as a set of car keys... and auto-rotation is not so much gliding as it is praying a clutch will save you.
      I like how Global Security described helicopter pilots: "They know if something bad has not happened it is about to."
      And the best quote was right near the top of the page, "Helicopters don't fly -- they beat the air into submission."
      http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/rotary.htm

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    9. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually a bit frustrating, because boring is what my company does and something of which my company has a lot of pride.

    10. Re: Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elon needs the boring stuff for Mars. That's were the Mars guys will live.

    11. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Invest in teleport terminals.

    12. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't 'Boring' need to come up w/ regular environmental impact statements? If everybody bored their way below the earth, entire cities would cave in

    13. Re:Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Helicopter maintenance issues would naturally go away with electric multi-rotor system. There are some already flying:

      http://www.volocopter.com/index.php/en/

    14. Re: Tubes or Tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monorail!

      D'oh!

  2. Someone already had the same idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is already a company called the boring company that does drilling and boring. Hes late by 20 years.

    1. Re:Someone already had the same idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But do they have a flag?

  3. Probably gave up on hyperloop.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because it was debunked by Thunderf00t

    1. Re:Probably gave up on hyperloop.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I am think he sat and listened to a smug cunt who is full of himself. :D
      He could create great videos, but I can't stand his ego.

  4. Must be some new government subsidy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US government is good at paying people to dig holes and fill them in again, so why shouldn't Musk get in on the action?

    1. Re:Must be some new government subsidy by slashdice · · Score: 0

      Yep. With most people, it's "follow the money". With Elon Musk (as in anal scent), it's "follow the government subsidy".

      --
      Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
  5. Traffic is still traffic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All he'd be doing is shifting it underground. Gridlock would still be there.

    1. Re:Traffic is still traffic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tunnel jams would really suck.

    2. Re:Traffic is still traffic. by mlts · · Score: 1

      It might be useful if coupled with self-driving cars, where the tunnels are only for the SDCs. Couple this with underground parking, automated charging stations, and even service garages, and this could be quite useful. Especially for cities like Austin where there are residential towers going up with zero added parking, so having the ability for vehicles to be parked underground will be quite useful, especially with the fact that there is no hope of light rail, much less a viable subway system ever happening.

    3. Re:Traffic is still traffic. by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Except that the reason most residential towers don't build parking if they can get away with it is that underground parking garages are expensive, even if you just need to dig a hole in the ground to build them in. Building them underneath existing stuff is not going to be feasible most places.

    4. Re: Traffic is still traffic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could use a vacuum to suck the cars out when they're stuck.

  6. He'll need to go deep. by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Otherwise he'll get run into massive amounts of cost and delays due to existing underground infrastructure - of which some old elements may not be marked accurately (or even at all) on any map.

    I can only guess that he feels he has some alternative design for a tunnel boring machine that could be cheaper than today's designs and more tolerant to problematic geology. A thought that may or may not be accurate.

    --
    "... even though he sins so much that people cast him out of demons."
    1. Re:He'll need to go deep. by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He's suffering from Shockley/Chomsky syndrome. A smart person that thinks they are smart about things they have no training, knowledge or ability in.

      Comes from having their asses kissed too much (sustained by being surrounded by echo chambers, hence Shockley went away, but Chomsky keeps on blathering).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the government subsidies will cover any unexpected costs

    3. Re:He'll need to go deep. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Guess who is on Trump's 'advisory' team? Guess what Trump wants to spend trillions of dollars on? (Infrastructure in case you missed the twit.)

      Digging big holes is infrastructure. He doesn't have to have much more than a bunch of animated You Tube videos to scarf a few billion dollars before everybody finds out that there isn't any money to do all that.

      Smart guy. Always ahead of the curve.

      Besides, tunneling deep underground is going to be easier than getting to Mars and just might be a good idea in a couple of years.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet some such people turn several of their ideas into successful ventures. Sometimes coming at things from a different angle than established players is exactly what is needed to take things in a new direction. Did the founder of eBay have any knowledge or experience in e-commerce? No; he was a programmer. Did Richard Branson have any experience in running a record business? No; he didn't have any experience at anything, since he was still at school when he started his record business. People who think they already know everything there is to know about a business or sector are unlikely to be innovators.

    5. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2

      Otherwise he'll get run into massive amounts of cost and delays due to existing underground infrastructure - of which some old elements may not be marked accurately (or even at all) on any map.

      Supposing he's talking about creating a subway system for the Los Angeles area, going deep may be no help. There are currently over 4000 operating oil wells in the Los Angeles Basin, and thousands of abandoned ones. Not to mention the whole basin at subway depths is soft, sedimentary, and tectonically active. I was under the impression that there are good geological reasons why LA doesn't have a subway system. The boring is the easy part; coming up with a tunnel liner that can withstand constant low grade earthquakes is the hard part.

    6. Re:He'll need to go deep. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Smart humans have lots of potential. But the world is full of endeavours that require a full human effort to master. These people then sometimes make it 'look easy', but it isn't.

      Thinking 'I'm good at X, therefore I can set the world of Y on fire' is the definition of arrogance. Sometimes it's true, when the world of Y is fossilized, but when Y is already moving forward rapidly (like tunnel boring technology)? Tunnel boring is not currently a capital deprived industry. Even with electric cars, Musk just put his capital at risk a few years before the majors, didn't really invent anything and the outcome is far from certain.

      Musk's real effort on innovation is SpaceX, which is coincidentally what his academic credentials are for.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    7. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He has stated that his reason for collecting capital is to fund human settlement on Mars. It's bound to be expensive, and so perhaps his assessment is that even his existing successful businesses are not sure enough to be sufficient to kickstart the process. If he has insider information from Trump as to how much may be spent on tunnelling projects and he has done his research on boring (he has been talking about boring for >1.5 years), then it makes sense that he has interest in the project. Although he is a super-talented guy, he has surely placed people in positions at his existing companies to mind the ship when he is busy elsewhere.

    8. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

      so your argument is that he is brilliant at soaking up government subsidies ?

    9. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      I submit that one of Elon's prime assets is his social capital -- i.e. Elon says that X could be a thing, and as a result of his saying so, enough talented/knowledgeable people get excited about it that it (sometimes) actually becomes a thing, because they then go ahead and implement it (regardless of whether Elon himself ever had the ability to implement it on his own).

      Frankly, our society could use more of that. There are too many naysayers, and not enough people willing to take a risk and try something new.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    10. Re:He'll need to go deep. by swillden · · Score: 2

      He's suffering from Shockley/Chomsky syndrome. A smart person that thinks they are smart about things they have no training, knowledge or ability in.

      Comes from having their asses kissed too much (sustained by being surrounded by echo chambers, hence Shockley went away, but Chomsky keeps on blathering).

      Yeah, like a guy who built an online payment system thinking that qualifies him to start a solar energy company, or a high-performance electric car company, or even something really crazy like a rocket company.

      I get what you're saying, but Musk has a rather exceptional track record of achieving his aims.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    11. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      ...but when Y is already moving forward rapidly (like tunnel boring technology)...

      I wouldn't call tunnel boring "moving forward rapidly". /duck

    12. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Zargg · · Score: 1

      Besides, tunneling deep underground is going to be easier than getting to Mars and just might be a good idea in a couple of years.

      Perhaps his goal is to be able to tunnel deep underground ON Mars in a couple of years?

    13. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so your argument is that he is brilliant at soaking up government subsidies ?

      So far that is all that his companies do. Subsidies for electric vehicles, subsidies for solar panels and NASA subsidies. LATimes says he has gotten almost 5b is subsidies so far.
      http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html

    14. Re:He'll need to go deep. by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      There are lots of high hopes for these ventures already, but so far Musk hasn't gone beyond LEO or sold a car cheaper than $100k. The solar energy company, he acquired.

      Musk is really brilliant but I think he gets bored too quickly. Finish what you started, you must.

    15. Re:He'll need to go deep. by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      See SpaceX and NASA. Spot on.

    16. Re:He'll need to go deep. by swillden · · Score: 1

      There are lots of high hopes for these ventures already, but so far Musk hasn't gone beyond LEO or sold a car cheaper than $100k

      Actually the Model S starts at well under $100K, and I'm sure plenty of them have been sold for less than that.

      I get your point, though.

      Musk is really brilliant but I think he gets bored too quickly. Finish what you started, you must.

      If you're the one doing all of it, sure. If you can hire lots of brilliant and energetic people and they're moving forward well, you can expand.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    17. Re:He'll need to go deep. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      People with lots of capital can make big splashes. I can't help but note that the success of Tesla is far from assured, much less SpaceX.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    18. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are lots of high hopes for these ventures already, but so far Musk hasn't gone beyond LEO or sold a car cheaper than $100k. The solar energy company, he acquired.

      Musk is really brilliant but I think he gets bored too quickly. Finish what you started, you must.

      He actually already went past LEO - the DSCOVR space observatory has been launched by a Falcon 9 to Sun - Earth L1 point.

    19. Re:He'll need to go deep. by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Um... LA has a subway.

      The biggest problem is usually the methane and not the seismic issues though.

    20. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elon Musk calls himself a "nano-manager", so there's a question if he's willing to step outside of the (hyper)loop and really let things run themselves. Also, he already has his plate full with Tesla and SpaceX and his other side projects. He's already reduced his eating and sleeping to a minimum, so unless he gets rid of those entirely, something else is going to have to give.

    21. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Musk's real effort on innovation is SpaceX

      Which has done nothing innovative.

    22. Re:He'll need to go deep. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Move the goal posts much?

      Musk created a successful online payment system. He created a company that builds high performance electric cars, and appears to be an industry leader in that market; who cares how much they cost? He created a rocket company that seems to be doing well, winning contracts for deliveries to ISS and creating (one of?) the first reusable first stage rockets; IIRC SpaceX launches are also much cheaper than anyone else's.

      Musk has started companies that have been successful innovators in several areas. I doubt very much he's personally responsible for technical success in each. More likely he's got an inspiring personality and enough sense to find people who know what they're doing, acquire resources for them to do it, and get out of the way.

    23. Re:He'll need to go deep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he is going to need digging expertise to be able to build habitats on Mars.

  7. Another dream to sell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it will work, and not completely be supported by govt handouts and investor money. I'm sure it will turn a real profit.

    1. Re:Another dream to sell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your jealousy is showing.

      We're laughing at it, dangling there and how small you are.

  8. Already exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has existed in Europe for quite a while now.

    1. Re:Already exists by sr180 · · Score: 1

      Switzerland for Example. Where most flat countries have bypasses to go around towns, Switzerland simply has tunnels.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
  9. Wasn't it obvious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In order for the hyperloop to work it's going to need tunnels... and lots of them.

  10. Its a solved problem by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're called Metro systems. There's even one in LA though he may not know that since he probably hasn't been on public transport since he was in his mothers womb. Amazingly they travel through tunnels underground and bypass road traffic! Who knew?

    1. Re:Its a solved problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right and he can build a fleet of Telsa cars which can be summoned to the Metro system to take you the final leg of the journey. It would drop you off and then go back and recharge while queued for the next passengers.

    2. Re:Its a solved problem by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      They're called Metro systems./quote>

      Elon Musk does not take mass transit. That's for the common folk.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Its a solved problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're called Metro systems.

      Yeah, because large cities that have extensive public transit systems (Like Chicago, New York, and LA) totally don’t have horrendous traffic problems.

      In other news, the sarcasm allocation I’d set aside for the rest of the month has now been blown, so there’s that.

    4. Re:Its a solved problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think of the innovation! He can invent some sort of scheduling scheme so that his "transport pods" need not worry about running into one another! And for efficiency... hmm... I hear that steel wheels on steel rails have remarkably love coefficients of friction: he should invent some sort of vehicle to take advantage of that! Oh yeah, and carrying all of those batteries sounds terribly inefficient: surely there must be some brilliant innovation he can come up with to get around the need for batteries on his steel-wheeled transport pods entirely. Oh well, he's the genius: I'm sure he'll think of something.

    5. Re:Its a solved problem by jwdb · · Score: 1

      LA's metro is rubbish, and traffic is very much not a "solved problem" in LA. The low density of sprawl combined with the metro being laid out as a star with no cross links means it's usually faster just to sit in traffic. Here in Pasadena the metro regularly blocks traffic because, in contrast to what you assert, it is most certainly not all underground. Metro is also not a solved problem for a city as low density as LA, as how do you maintain coverage while keep down travel time and still get enough riders to make it profitable?

      Also, considering that he doesn't say what he'll put in the tunnels he's planning to bore, it may very well be more metro.

    6. Re:Its a solved problem by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      When/if the Sepulveda Pass tunnel gets built, it should open transit for a larger number of commuters, but agree that density is the problem.

      Tunneling systems might be ready for a shake-up. TBMs are slow... maybe there is a better way.

    7. Re:Its a solved problem by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      It's true that when the traffic reaches a certain density, the only way forward is to put in mass transit, and in the largest cities this has to be a subway. But currently, there is a culture of drivers and a parallel culture of transit riders, even in cities with a fairly good transit system.

      What Silicon Valley can help with is integrating the new generation of Uber/Lyft services with mass transit into one app that uses a transit link to get through the most crowded parts of a city and ridesharing to handle the fanout to every address. This will, rather than just automating the gridlock, lead to significantly less car traffic, especially as cars go automated in years to come.

      Will cities go along, or will they vainly try to fight the trend, as the medallion cab drivers did?

    8. Re:Its a solved problem by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      The LA Metro already reaches as far as San Bernardino, approximately a million miles from City Hall, but only the line from Union Station through Hollywood is underground. Underground construction is expensive, especially in a city that is riddled with faults and petroleum pockets. A portion of the Santa Monica line now under construction is being built through tar.

    9. Re:Its a solved problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even the common folk don't want to take mass transit.

      Who wants to sit in a dirty smelly tin can, with crazies, that doesn't even take you where you want, at inconvenient times?

    10. Re:Its a solved problem by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, because large cities that have extensive public transit systems (Like Chicago, New York, and LA) totally donâ(TM)t have horrendous traffic problems."

      Err yeah, that traffic is despite the metro/subway, not because of it. What do you think the traffic in manhatten would be like if everyone had to drive to work there? Idiot.

    11. Re:Its a solved problem by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      The Enlightened city dwelling elites.

    12. Re:Its a solved problem by drsquare · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to be a subway, plenty of roads in LA they could put tracks on.

    13. Re:Its a solved problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, Slashdot comments... So much drama. To be a young man again and think the most important thing is a good rant.
      No, LA's metro isn't rubbish. But yes, traffic is hardly solved. You're quite right that, taken as a whole metro area, mass transit (buses and metro combined) hardly solves it and is pretty damn inconvenient. I live in West LA and work in Pasadena, and mass transit, even with the optimizations they plan for the next decade, is not a realistic alternative to driving.
      On the other hand, not everyone commutes across the entire enormous county. For those whose activity is limited to, say, Santa Monica or other smaller areas, mass transit is a great way to get around. I use it regularly. But then, I'm from NYC, and consider mass transit not only an ordinary convenience but also a social good, mixing people for everyone's benefit. Biking to the metro and going to Santa Monica, Culver City, or DTLA, is fun and pretty quick. The trains are crowded with all sorts of people.
      The promise of LA and many other cities is that here, you can finally never have to look at people different from you. You can segregate your communities and get around by private car. I suppose I understand the appeal to many folks, but I think it's double-plus ungood for the culture as a whole.

    14. Re:Its a solved problem by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Do you have any links to how they are accomplishing tunneling through tar? Do they just treat it like an underwater tunnel?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    15. Re:Its a solved problem by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1
  11. just start digging will not be Boring when the hit by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    just start digging will not be Boring when they hit sometime up till the court part.

  12. Super Villian by Ksevio · · Score: 2

    Has he by any chance purchased an island with an active volcano? Seems like he has all the tools for an underground lair that launches rockets.

    1. Re:Super Villian by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

      I don't know if he has a cat. That would be the real topper. A fluffy white cat...

    2. Re:Super Villian by Megane · · Score: 1

      I was just looking for the picture with the toy cat and his finger to his mouth, but this web site sums everything up too perfectly: http://www.stopelonmusk.org/ The man is a living meme.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  13. Off his rocker by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    This guy has gone completely off his rocket. Who Tweets stuff like that? Him and Trump.

    1. Re:Off his rocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So Musk is running for president?

    2. Re:Off his rocker by AJWM · · Score: 2

      He can't. Not of the US anyway, not without a Constitutional Amendment. He's African-American. ;-)

      He's doing fine right where he is, anyway.

      --
      -- Alastair
  14. Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't running:
    - A car design and manufacturing company
    - A rocket launcher and capsule design and manufacturing company
    - A lithium batter design and manufacturing company
    - Managing a very high speed mass transportation concept
    enough for one person?

    It's not like Tesla cars are perfect or that SpaceX launcher's aren't blowing up on the pad and I don't think battery one has come out of SolarCity yet.

    Mr. Musk has come up with some great ideas, but I think he needs to keep his (business) interests limited to ensure that they are all successful and outstanding products.

    1. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by kiviQr · · Score: 1

      No, he needs to keep momentum going. He is a visionary and he needs the right people to keep ventures going.

    2. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by sinij · · Score: 1

      He is not entitled to succeed, unless on merits, but he is absolutely entitled to try anything and everything he chooses to do that doesn't actively harms others. This list does include twitting while on meth.

      I think much better criticism is to point out that tunneling isn't cost effective. Especially in milder climates like in California, multi-level raised highways are probably much better approach.

    3. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His creations are seriously risking going the Google Hangouts way.

    4. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's only got 1 life. If he's got ideas to try and resources to make it happen, all the power to him. He's pretty good at kicking stuff into gear and getting stuff moving... whether it continues once he moves on is another story.

    5. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget his ultimate goal is Mars. He is trying to advance all the technologies he might need for settlement. Maybe not all but most where he probably feels we are not there yet. And boring might be logical step. Maybe 3D printing (small and large) will be next.

    6. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by ClarkMills · · Score: 1

      > but I think he needs to keep his (business) interests limited to ensure that they are all successful

      I think that's probably where someone else would be better. He gets the ball rolling in very hard areas and I would hate to see him bogged down in management.

      Maybe "flying [electric] cars" are the future...

    7. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has he not mentioned anything about trip to Mars and establishing a colony there?

    8. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Unless Mars turns out to have caves, dig and cover is likely to be the best way to construct radiation shielding.

      Even on earth, tunnel boring machines are mostly used where dig and cover is impossible (under cites, through a mountain, under the English channel etc).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yes because the answer to preventing rockets from blowing up on the pad is for a CEO who has no idea about rocket science to sit in the room and demand the problems away?

      Do you realise that innovators, investors, and entrepreneurs don't exactly sit around getting in the nitty gritty of the companies right?

      But hey let's also ignore that so far only one SpaceX mission hasn't been a success, even if many of them have gone bang AFTER a successful mission. Let's ignore that Solarcity has already not only delivered batteries but actually did larger scale mini-grid work for 600 residents of an island nation. We need more CEO micromanagement.

    10. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that spacex isn't the only one blowing up rockets right? the ever reliable Soyuz just lost a rocket that was being sent up to resupply the ISS, SpaceX doesn't have the best record, but by far not the worst.

    11. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by atrex · · Score: 1

      I wonder if it could be related to a design problem with the Hyperloop, ie if the Hyperloop system was unable to easily adapt to mountains and other terrain features while it might otherwise easily go under them instead. Or maybe he's planning to go asteroid mining after he gets setup on Mars.

    12. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Tesla / SolarCity have indeed shipped and installed plenty of batteries, with this being probably the most prominent example.

      There was even a Slashdot article about it less than a month ago.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    13. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that spacex isn't the only one blowing up rockets right? the ever reliable Soyuz just lost a rocket that was being sent up to resupply the ISS, SpaceX doesn't have the best record, but by far not the worst.

      No they literally have the worst record in the history of rocketry.

    14. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ALL of his business interests are geared towards putting humans on Mars.

      Prehaps he sees boring INTO Martian mountains as a useful way of making habitats in this vision?

    15. Re:Like a kid in a (methamphetamine) candy store by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't he just hire the specialist if and when he needs it?

      Tunnel boring is specialized and pretty advanced at this point. Dedicated machines to bore anything from conduit between manholes and highway tunnels.

      If he's doing it, he thinks he needs the knowledge under his control. Likely he is thinking of Mars, cave systems and living space. Maybe the moon though, water ice extraction for fuel, more immediate and would require new work to make ice tunnel boring machines. 10 years on his presumed plan, not 20-30. Also making living space on the moon.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  15. None. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Mr. Musk,

    Sir, I apologise for disturbing your inane self-narration, but I must kindly request that you shut up.

    Sincerely,
    Some internet loser who doesn't even own a yacht.

  16. Elon, there's other stuff to do by John_3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I personally have thought up half a dozen cheap ways to give drivers who are approaching traffic lights enough information that they don't have to hit it red and stop --- things that work like the countdowns provided by pedestrian walk lights. And it doesn't have to be mandatory. If maybe 30% of drivers use the inforrmation to coast through, then the other 70% will have no choice. A lot of gas could probably be saved.

    This sort of thing has probably been patented many times but I've never see any mention of it anywhere. Take it and run, Elon.

    1. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Round where I live, drivers WANT to hit the red lights. If the light is green, and they could make it through just by driving the speed limit, they'll slow down as much as they have to so that they get there on red, even if there are no cars in front of them in the way. I've seen people slow down to 20mph in a 45mph zone in order to hit a red light, which makes me do the same if I'm behind them.

      I think they like doing this because it gives them more time to use their phone apps. At least that is the only sensible explanation I've thought of so far.

    2. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by Sique · · Score: 2

      I've seen things like that in action. When I was a child, we had some traffic lights with additional signs showing the speed necessary to get to the next traffic lights when they are about to turn green. I've seen similar signalling at a rural road close with several traffic lights following each other. At each traffic light there is an additional indicator showing what speed will get you to the next traffic light at green.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    3. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I personally have thought up half a dozen cheap ways to give drivers who are approaching traffic lights enough information that they don't have to hit it red and stop --- things that work like the countdowns provided by pedestrian walk lights.

      These are common in many other countries, and they work well. I have no idea why they aren't used in America.

      They look like this.

      Another good and common idea is instead of traffic lights cycling through (green)-(yellow)-(red)-(green), have them cycle through (green)-(green+yellow)-(red)-(red+yellow)-(green). This warns people when the light is about to turn green, so they can get ready to go, and helps traffic flow more quickly. I have never seen this done in America.

    4. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, modern cars have stop-start, so they turn off their engines when stopped and restart automatically when the driver wants to take off again. This works not just at lights, but at non-light junctions, in heavy traffic, etc, doesn't depend on other drivers, and is already implemented. Problem already solved. Your idea would actually be detrimental with a traffic mix that includes increasing numbers of cars with stop-start, since you would be preventing their engines from being turned off completely.

      I question the gas savings that would be achieved by your idea in any case; you're still going to slow down and then accelerate after the junction, perhaps not as much as if coming to a full stop, but still some - but I'm not going to do your sums for you. Empirically it seems like a complicated and ineffectual system. Sorry bud, back to the drawing board.

    5. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      I'm really surprised that more traffic engineers don't time lights on major arterials just to keep traffic moving. One of the places I've seen timed lights in action is in downtown Salem, Oregon - if you go 28 to 30 mph you can go from one end of Commercial Street to the other without stopping unless someone in front of you does something dumb.

      This seems like a fairly obvious thing to do to mitigate congestion and pollution, and yet doesn't see wide implementation for reasons beyond my understanding.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    6. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      restarting the engine doesn't come without cost. And, light timing doesn't require the fleet of vehicles being driven on the road to be completely changed out.

      Why in fuck would you say that light timing doesn't need to be done because 5% of the cars on the road will shut off the engine while you are standing on the brakes...sometimes? That might take today's dumbest post award.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Many retailers strongly dislike timing the lights like that. They'd prefer you stop at a lot of red lights so that you notice their store while you're waiting for the light.

      You'll even get to see their expensive signage for their exciting 0% interest* financing

    8. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Timing lights isn't usually possible. If the distance between lights varies, you can't time in both directions. And even in a perfectly regular grid, you can't time both north-south and east west at the same time. In NYC the avenues (north-south) are all one-way and timed. The streets (east-west) suffer.

    9. Re:Elon, there's other stuff to do by John_3000 · · Score: 1

      Coward, when you brake you convert your car's kinetic energy to heat in your brake pads or, at best, recharge a battery with efficiency way lower than 100%. When you accelerate back up to your original speed, you use fuel or battery charge (which came from fuel) to replace that kinetic energy. So you don't want to stop. By far the most efficient way to get through the light is to coast through it in neutral. Honestly, I thought everyone knew this.

  17. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    In terms of depth, that's what I thought - how deep do you have to tunnel to make sure you don't hit anything man-made? I'm also thinking of geo-thermal heating/cooling piping that can do down a couple of hundred feet.

    Regardless of how deep, it will also have to be fast. I believe current borers (correct term?) drill at the rate of 1-2 metres per day. To be fair, a big part of what they do is mould concrete and rebar into a completed tunnel which is a big, complicated job, but for anything else to come about, it would have to be at least 10x faster - at that rate, you would do a kilometer every three months. This would be pretty good for the central city, but barely acceptable for going out to the burbs and not acceptable at all when anything beyond that is required - then you would want to have 100+ metres per day.

    In "Oath of Fealty", Niven and Pournelle had a borer that seemed to reach this speed by melting rock rather than cutting it and making the rock cool to form the walls and ceiling of the tunnel.

  18. Re-invent the subways? by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    I do understand that very high speed transport can be created in tubes. I'm not so certain that it is such a great idea. I do have hope that autonomous cars can actually eliminate a great deal of traffic congestion. For example, imagine a driverless, grocery delivery vehicle that carries groceries to four homes. Normally we would see four cars making round trips to the store. But the store can deliver to four homes with only one vehicle. A drug store could deliver to quite a few homes with one autonomous vehicle. Pizza delivery is an issue as the cost of the driver is a factor. But with an electric, autonomous pizza delivery system the cost of the driver vanishes and the need to buy gasoline also vanishes. I suppose one could even have a pizza cooking system on board as well. The idea being that the vehicle could deliver to several homes in one run rather than having numerous people driving to pick up their dinner. It does seem to me that machinery that could get the poisonous materials out of rivers and streams would be a better way to go than just putting more tubes in the earth. Many states have big trouble with toxins in the river bottoms and so far there is no efficient or reasonable way to fix that issue.

    1. Re:Re-invent the subways? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      How about just building stores within walking distance of homes?

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  19. Oh come on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was clearly joking. Get a sense of humour.

  20. Not just boring. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you know anything about the science behind colonization of Mars, you'd realize that people will need to live underground (at least at first) because of the high radiation striking the surface. When terraforming occurs that bulks up the atmosphere and some kind of planetary magnetic shielding can be implemented, only then will people walk unprotected on the surface. Until that point, the most effective way of building underground cities would be to have some kind of boring technology that can hollow out and reinforce underground spaces for people to live in.

    The technology can also be used here on Earth to exponentially increase the total volume of cities by going underground. Brilliant.

    1. Re:Not just boring. by AJWM · · Score: 1

      I was wondering whether somebody would comment on the Mars connection. Musk doesn't seem to do anything without there being a Mars connection.

      Well observed. (Although radiation isn't that extreme, it is a concern ... as are meteorites that the thin atmosphere also doesn't shield too well from. This may be as much about mining (digging for ice deposits?) as about tunnels to live in.)

      --
      -- Alastair
  21. With those tweets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe he is preparing to run for president.

  22. Aerospace company stock spikes due to DYAC by starglider29a · · Score: 1

    "Shares of Boeing spiked momentarily as a tweet from Elon Musk hinted at buying the Aerospace giant. When asked, stock pickers universally believed that 'boring' was an autocorrect artifact."

    #fakenews #autocorrupt #dyac

  23. With those tweets by angelbar · · Score: 1

    Maybe he is preparing to run for president

    --
    -no sig today-
  24. The ultimate first-world problem. by jpellino · · Score: 2

    Your $90K car not being able to move through your $1M/mi highways at a speed that will not make you frowny. As much as I still think Bill Gates might be the Bob Dylan of tech (talent factor roughly equivalent to right place/right time factor) I think Bill has done the right thing with Being A Wealthy Person in giving money to projects that will solve the "we're dying here" problems. There's the old bit about Bill Gates makes so much money that it would be a net loss for him to stop and pick up a $100 bill. Musk seems to think that such time-saving for productive people is an actual plan to make money and that the majority cares about such kewl solutions. Also, people who think that everyone would rather spend time in a driverless car or a tube pod rather than with their hands on the wheel and their foot on the accelerator are mis-judging up to a third of the travel population.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, people who think that everyone would rather spend time in a driverless car or a tube pod rather than with their hands on the wheel and their foot on the accelerator are mis-judging up to a third of the travel population.

      Think how much more fun being in that 1/3 will be when anyone without the ability or desire to drive are off the road.

    2. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gates' maternal grandfather was JW Maxwell, a national bank president, his father was a prominent lawyer, and his mother served on the board of directors for First Interstate BancSystem. He nor his family is "new" money; you give him more credit than he deserves towards his innate ability to manage his finances.

    3. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are different ways of viewing progress. Slowing down on new-research part to bring up everyone else to the same standard of living you have is a nice goal... but that doesn't advance humanity forward.

      If we took that approach say 200 years ago, we'd still be helping farmers get access to horses world over, etc. So Bill Gates approach only looks good from short-term thinking perspective. It accelerates regression.. We wouldn't have reached the moon if "resources were better spent" elsewhere (there are always poor people to pour money to).

      Elon may not accomplish much *today* and today's stuff may only benefit the top 2% of the world population (while 98% may be in poverty, with all the problems that brings). But in 100-200 years, it's ideas from folks like Elon that will truly advance human kind (and have the greater impact on reducing poverty, etc.)

      Just think what life would be like if robots did all the manual labor in the world (assuming somewhat equal distribution of benefits). That would help a lot more people world over than say saving 10 million lives today via vaccination efforts... yah, it's grim (especially if you're on the bottom of the scale today).

    4. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by deadhammer · · Score: 2

      Also, people who think that everyone would rather spend time in a driverless car or a tube pod rather than with their hands on the wheel and their foot on the accelerator are mis-judging up to a third of the travel population.

      Please. In real life, you're not driving with your hands on the wheel and your foot on the accelerator and the top down on your new convertible through a wide open road through endless rolling hills in the warn friendly sun with the wind blowing through your long luxurious hair while women swoon and men seethe in jealousy and the supermodel sitting beside you gently caresses your leg and YES THIS IS YOUR FANTASY JUST ADMIT IT!

      In real life, your foot is shuffling back and forth between the accelerator and the brake as your hands are on both the horn and raising a middle finger in the air as everyone man and woman alike lurches through bumper-to-bumper traffic in a thin brown haze as your broken air conditioner fails to keep the sweltering heat from turning you into a sweaty disgusting mass and everyone is late for work and miserable and nobody knows how to drive except for me so could everyone please JUST GET OFF THE FUCKING ROAD AND LET ME GET TO WORK!!!!!

      Honestly, I'd rather not have to worry about that and just sit with my coffee and phone until my stop.

      --
      I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
    5. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Also, people who think that everyone would rather spend time in a driverless car or a tube pod rather than with their hands on the wheel and their foot on the accelerator are mis-judging up to a third of the travel population.

      No. There's a big difference between driving for fun and driving to commute. To be clear I love driving, I would just not ever like to do it on the way to or from or for work (unless I change careers and become a race driver) ever again.

      The ultimate first-world problem.

      Yes. Large population scale inefficiencies such as people stuck in traffic instead of working or enjoying themselves, power grids running non-optimally due to swinging demands, and having to throw away a rocket after each use really are first world problems. And? Just because we're the first world no one should try and fix them? The words "first world problems" are the ultimate cop-out, and I do like the irony of someone posting this comment on the internet while there are people in the world who can't afford to eat.

    6. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Careful about the generalizations you make.

      I love driving. I really do. To the point where some friends and I are making a cheap endurance racer so we can run some 16-hour in a weekend races. That being said, there's some drives that I would love to let the car take care of while I do something more engaging. Ever driven between Cincinnati and Columbus? Portland and Eugene? Bay Area and Southern California? Anywhere in Nebraska? These are painful, stupefyingly boring drives with nothing to look at, no turns or hills to speak of, and just a hundred+ miles of 'are we there yet'. There's probably other examples you can think of, where you would rather be watching a movie or reading a book than mindlessly holding the car in a straight direction at a constant speed for the next 3 hours.

      I have no problem with autopilot, as long as I can turn it off when I want to. It's the next evolution of cruise control, which nobody complains about.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by jpellino · · Score: 1

      That's likely the fantasy a third of the drivers have. Otherwise they would buy the reliable boring car.

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    8. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by jpellino · · Score: 1

      I'm down with the solar and the rockets. And with the open source tech that could lead to more efficient cars. But thinking you're going to make commutes better by digging holes in the ground that cost an order of magnitude more than roads is not his most though out idea.

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    9. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by jpellino · · Score: 1

      I did specify a portion of drivers, not all of them in general. About a third of the drivers you find anywhere simply want to be at the front of the pack, passing whomever they can, regardless of the speed involved. That said, give me back my Neon R/T and some Vermont secondaries.

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    10. Re:The ultimate first-world problem. by jpellino · · Score: 1

      Guns or butter. Bill can do his work independent of Musk. The two do not compete for resources as they made / are making their money with new markets. But there is a bit of an eye opener when Musk decides he is too impatient to sit in traffic and thinks about doing something that will drain money even from him faster than he can calculate it. We made huge strides in this country thanks to eradication and control of diseases. We have near zero occurrences of diseases here that people routinely die of in what would be shocking numbers in the US. Gates is applying it elsewhere, but "elsewhere" to some looks like throwing it down a rat hole. The US was once that rat hole. We took solid approaches to farming (to use your example) and those farming changes did not take a moon shot - it was farm by farm with relatively simple solutions (look up the history of 4-H). And no one has the foggiest idea what life would be like for a given person if robots did all the manual labor. Why? Because there is no way to ensure that it would be the one tech advance we make with zero unintended consequences. There's a reason Michael Crichton could write the same story over an over again with different genre veneers.

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  25. Next Big Thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was the last Big Thing?

  26. fun, but perhaps not novel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Links to some thoughts of other content.
    http://www.projectcamelot.org/underground_bases.html
    http://www.stevequayle.com/index.php?s=97

    If boring is new, perhaps it is a tech-transfer activity to start (finally) transferring taxpayer/citizen funded research into value to the taxpayer/citizen. Value isn't value unless it is realized.

    -EngrStudent

  27. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Regardless of how deep, it will also have to be fast. I believe current borers (correct term?) drill at the rate of 1-2 metres per day.

    According to Crossrail, the largest distance tunnelled by one of their boring machines in a single day was "72 metres by Ellie on 16 April 2014 between Pudding Mill Lane and Stepney Green". So 1-2 metres seems to be out by quite a bit.

  28. Re:Elon is a genius!! by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Funny

    He's a traitor! He wants to end reliance on fossil fuels. In Tumpmerica, he will be arrested, charged with crimes against coal, and thrown in prison!

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  29. Underground infrastructure isn't really the problm by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

    Southern California isn't the best place for a subway. There are currently only two underground subway lines, and they came in vastly over budget - the Metro Red line's original cost estimate was $400 million; it was completed for $4.5 billion. It held the record for the most expensive civic construction project until Boston's Big Dig.

    The reason is that SoCal is full of oil. If you visit, you'll see functioning oil pumps scattered around in random places. It bubbles out of the ground naturally in the La Brea Tar Pits, and into the surrounding ocean as underwater oil seeps. When they dug the first tunnels for the Red line, the workers returned the next day to find oil and tar seeping in through the walls of the freshly-dug tunnel. They had to stop construction until they could come up with new ways to hold back the seepage and insure it wouldn't become a problem in the future decades of subway operation. (The Big Dig was expensive because of similar problems, except with seawater seepage.)

    Oh yeah, the earthquakes tend to be a problem too. Especially if your tunnel crosses over a fault line.

  30. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by fisted · · Score: 1

    how deep do you have to tunnel to make sure you don't hit anything man-made?

    Deeper than the last guy (is what she said, I know, I know). And hey, once you're done, you have made something man-made to hit at the new, previously unoccupied depth.

  31. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    Thank you for the update - I didn't realize how much the technology had improved over the past few years.

    My 1-2metre/day was based on the first generation borers used in Toronto about ten years ago. The five year old models in Toronto worked at around 10metres/day and the latest (3rd generation) ones are doing significantly better (although I don't think they're making the 38metres/day of the Crossrail borers).

  32. Re:Elon is a genius!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your tears are delicious

  33. Re:Elon is a genius!! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    As are yours delicate little Trumpite snowflake.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  34. Roads belong underground by crow · · Score: 2

    I've long thought that ultimately roads should be underground. I would absolutely love to live in a subdivision with underground roads. Think how wonderful it would be to walk outside your house and only have walking and bicycle paths! In the winter, you would never have to worry about icy roads or snow plows, which also means you would have vastly fewer potholes in the roads.

    We've already learned to put much of our other infrastructure underground. My neighborhood has all the wires buried. The only reason older neighborhoods still have above ground wires is the cost of burying them.

    Cost.

    Yup, that's the only problem here. I fear that even if the boring of the tunnel were free, the cost of tunnels would be prohibitive in most situations (you have to build a secure wall and ceiling, and you have to install a ventilation system along with lighting). I suppose if your boring machine had a built-in fusion reactor, it could melt what it bores through and create a nice solid shell and even leave a nice road surface. If you only allow electric cars in the tunnels, you can forego the ventilation system.

    I think this is still science fiction for now, but if anyone can figure out how to make it work with technology that can be built today, it's Elon Musk.

    1. Re: Roads belong underground by Voyager529 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it was Stephen Colbert who made an attempt to describe the Lincoln Tunnel to people who didn't live in New York:

      Imagine trying to get that contents of this container of jelly beans into this bucket, putting them all through these two drinking straws...Also, all of those jelly beans are late to work.

      A major problem is when accidents happen in tunnels. There is literally nowhere for anyone - including emergency vehicles - to go. Now, accidents in tunnels tend to be of the fender bender variety, but when a vehicle is rendered inoperable, you're just plain screwed. Making tunnels the way roads are built as a general rule is not the best of ideas - it's why subways make more sense as long as the stops can pick up and drop off enough people to nudge the needle of the rest of traffic. Manhattan would be utterly impassable without the subway moving half a million people a day.

      Nobody likes traffic, and nobody likes parking. LA has its problems due not simply to cost, but the lack of a useful alternative when dealing when that level of population density independent of a useful mass transit system.

    2. Re:Roads belong underground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why have potholes when you can have sinkholes!

      There's a big difference between ripping up the road to bury an 8" diameter tub a few feet down for some cables and boring 20+ foot diameter tunnels under developed areas. I wouldn't want to be in the tunnel or above it during a collapse. It's a great target for terrorists too.

    3. Re:Roads belong underground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tube*

    4. Re: Roads belong underground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with LA is that mass transit can't work. As cars became more prevelant, there became more sprawl, and mass transit simply couldn't work.

      If you take Manhattan as an example, it has under 60km^2 of land and, let's say, 240 subway stops, or 4 stops per km^2 of land. Plus it has major business districts (think "downtown") where millions of people work.

      Los Angeles has over 1200km^2 of land, requiring about 5,000 subway stops to have the same density. It's hard to imagine how LA could have an equivalent quality of service to Manhattan while having to be 20x the size.

      dom

    5. Re: Roads belong underground by fistacorpse · · Score: 1

      The problem with LA is that mass transit can't work. As cars became more prevelant, there became more sprawl, and mass transit simply couldn't work.

      If you take Manhattan as an example, it has under 60km^2 of land and, let's say, 240 subway stops, or 4 stops per km^2 of land. Plus it has major business districts (think "downtown") where millions of people work.

      Los Angeles has over 1200km^2 of land, requiring about 5,000 subway stops to have the same density. It's hard to imagine how LA could have an equivalent quality of service to Manhattan while having to be 20x the size.

      dom

      Counterpoint: Melbourne in Australia has 9,990km^2 of land, and there's very few places you can't get to by public transport. Granted, this includes trains (a few stops are underground, most above ground), trams and buses.

      See: https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

    6. Re:Roads belong underground by michael_wojcik · · Score: 1

      Ugh. Having driven through many a tunnel as part of a daily commute, I doubt very much that underground roads would be pleasant or effective. (I see someone else has already mentioned the problem with accidents and other obstructions.)

      Maybe we could restrict them to Segways and Rascal scooters. We were all told cities would be redesigned around the Segway - here's our opportunity!

      Or instead of underground roads, let's have underground moving walkways. Everyone who's gone between Concourses B and C at O'Harrible knows that's a transportation dream come true. Of course, cash-strapped municipalities may have to skimp on the grating neon lighting and New Age "music".

      Or maybe some sort of underground train system would work. Has that ever been tried?

      Really, it's a shame we don't have more urban planners rethinking in-city transportation. Those "airpark" communities worked out so well, for example.

      On a more serious note - yes, it's true that every idiot bashing about town in their own personal car is not a great transportation mode. Still beats cities full of horses, though. And while mass transit can work very well, in many places it doesn't, for one reason or another. I suspect this is not a problem with a bumper-sticker solution.

  35. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by Jeremi · · Score: 1

    Well, there's always the Uber approach -- tunnel at whatever depth you want, and if you hit something man-made, just keep drilling right through it and see if anyone ever notices or complains.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  36. Traffic is already a solved problem by Ichijo · · Score: 1

    Cities forcing businesses to provide free, abundant parking (this is the norm in the USA) and then wondering why they have a traffic problem is like having standing water on your property and wondering why you have a mosquito problem.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  37. High pressure gas pipeline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pffft. What's this high pressure gas pipeline sign for? I'm Elon Musk, I'm just gonna start diggi-

  38. Re: He'll need to go deep & fast by gigne · · Score: 1

    Don't know the terrain is like where musk is boring, but cross rail bored through silt and stiff clay. London is a river city and sits on lots of clay. Great for boring through. The channel tunnel got only a couple of meters per day because it was solid rock.
    http://www.tunneltalk.com/Cros...

    --
    Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
  39. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  40. We do what we must because we can. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boring a tunnel, with a nice large aperture.

    Can maybe solve the whole tunneling problem if he bypasses the digging altogether and just generates a portal.

    Elon Musk will burn your house down - with the lemons!

    Ok, back to work. Mondays, yeah?

  41. Like I said.......... by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1, Informative

    "Musk has also been working on resolving his frustration with traffic issues through above-ground means with his Hyperloop venture, which proposes a plan for mass-transit pods moving through above-ground tubes."

    Like I've said before, this Hyperloop horsecrap is NEVER going to happen. It's classic "pie in the sky" and will never be built due to a variety of issues, not the least of which are the insurmountable engineering problems. Then add stuff like right-of-way issues, safety concerns, fragility, security, production and on-going costs, and you'll see that the Hyperloop "plan" is 100% nonsense. It will never be built.

    It's like Boeing's "Sonic Cruiser" project, remember that? Of course you don't remember it, because it was never built. It was also a "pie in the sky" project- an enormously expensive new plane with virtually no user base. It would have required huge expenditures to build and a tremendous investment to operate, all to serve an extremely tiny, theoretical group of potential customers who would be willing to pay a friggin' fortune to get from point A to point B a full 30 minutes faster than existing aircraft services already provide. And it was a complete bust.

    I know the Hyperloop fanbois and the Elon Musk-worshipers will shit all over this and mod me down to oblivion, but that won't change the fact that the Hyperloop will never be built. It's just not gonna happen.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Like I said.......... by kamitchell · · Score: 1

      As a "pie in the sky" project, the Sonic Cruiser had the advantage of using actual sky.

    2. Re:Like I said.......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know some people at MIT who won the prototyping project competition and they agree with you:) Also Hyperloop predates Musk by many years (certainly by mid 50s).

    3. Re:Like I said.......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure every major accomplishment ever was completed despite a cacophony of ney-sayers.
      Musk needs boring machines to colonize Mars so he may as well perfect them here on Earth beforehand.
      The Hyperloop requires a vacuum to operate. You don't want malicious people to be able to have easy access to the tube so having it underground makes perfect sense.

    4. Re:Like I said.......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like I've said before, this Hyperloop horsecrap is NEVER going to happen. It's classic "pie in the sky" and will never be built due to a variety of issues, not the least of which are the insurmountable engineering problems. Then add stuff like right-of-way issues, safety concerns, fragility, security, production and on-going costs, and you'll see that the Hyperloop "plan" is 100% nonsense. It will never be built.

      People unaffiliated with Musk have already successfully run full scale tests and are currently building full scale working prototypes as we speak for demonstration in 2017.

      But hey don't let facts get in the way of unspecified "insurmountable engineering problems"... All that is necessary to reinforce your position is to cite an AIRCRAFT Boeing tabled.

      I know the Hyperloop fanbois and the Elon Musk-worshipers will shit all over this and mod me down to oblivion, but that won't change the fact that the Hyperloop will never be built. It's just not gonna happen.

      Your entitled to your opinions. However if you expect anyone else to care about what you have to say simply stating what you believe isn't sufficient. You need to put up with specific technical objections that can actually be examined and falsified. Simply believing it will cost too much or will be inherently unsafe is insufficient.

  42. Re:Elon is a genius!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't fall for it Marvin. He is trying to get you to eat your parents again. The tears are a reference to "Scott Tinnerman must die".

  43. Re:Elon is a genius!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Marvin,

    I thought you only got paid to troll climate change articles.

  44. is it "Boring" or Boaring"... by burhop · · Score: 2

    ...because I kind of thought he might be going off to Georgia to hunt one of those giant boars they show all the time on Youtube. It seems like something rich people would do.

  45. I welcome our tunneling overlords by hoggoth · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome Elon Musk's genetically engineered tunneling creatures: http://imgur.com/a/lfc9i

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  46. Re: He'll need to go deep & fast by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

    Maybe he watched that movie "Core" (I think) where they were able to build a machine that tunneled through miles of rock very quickly when they threw enough money at the problem.

  47. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by fisted · · Score: 1

    Then they should at least rename to Unter. Or Ünter, for the sake of consistency.

  48. Re:Underground infrastructure isn't really the pro by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    Obviously there were cost overruns because of things discovered while boring the tunnels, but I wonder how much of that 10x overrun was because of spectacularly bad planning and complete dishonesty on the part of the people who did the planning and the contractors who did the bidding. Mass transit projects have a long history of being over-budget and late, and not by a little. It leads one to think that project approval might be gained by having a dishonest price tag up front, and then the project survives due to the sunk cost fallacy, and nobody in government wanting to own up to what amounts to a complete shit estimate.

    But it happens almost every single time.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  49. Needed on Mars by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    If you recall, Musk previous stated that mining would have to be done on Mars. I think it's likely that he's working on automated mining because boring is one facet of mining. It could also be used to make underground tunnels on Mars between modules.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  50. Perfect match by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tunnel boring is actually a perfect match to his other businesses.

    Hyperloop requires straight tubes. If Microtunneling costs can be reduced by a magnitude, underground Hyperloop probably is cheaper than overground tubes.

    Dedicated tunnels for Autonomous cars match perfectly. Robotic vehicle tunnels can be small-diameter and multi-directional single-tube.

    Small tunnels are relatively cheap. Tunneling costs are proportional to the amount of rock removed.

  51. Holes in his theory by Neuronwelder · · Score: 1

    You can't use gas/diesel cars trucks without big ventilation. Large sums of money for implementation, materials and maintenance, Lighting and water pump electric bills. Er, um.. don't they already have these things, called subways?? Earthquake anyone? Yea, this will end well.

  52. Re:Elon is a genius!! by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Too bad he depends heavily on government funding for all his enterprises

  53. BigBertha by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    The problem with just "digging" is all the stuff underground you can see. Old pipes, forgotten tunnels, other people/organizations rights - there's a nightmare of obstacles to digging - least of which is the digging machine.

    1. Re:BigBertha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends how deep you go... there's currently a big tunnel being constructed under NYC's east river... way way way deeper than any subway... So if he can figure out how 1) get to bedrock, and 2) dig bedrock efficiently... then we could build tunnels going pretty much anywhere (only concerns would be pumping water out, and circulating air... but with fully electric cars/trains, that wouldn't be a critical problem).

  54. Re:Elon is a genius!! by canistel · · Score: 1

    ... and your point? The end result is that he is pushing progress forward. Many other areas and industries get subsidies or tax breaks, just the way the world works.

  55. Re:Underground infrastructure isn't really the pro by jwdb · · Score: 1

    It could also be happening almost every single time on these large projects because every single one is unique, with it's own set of unique and unforeseen problems. There's not always much heritage knowledge that can be used to predictably plan such a project, and issues can balloon into major reworks if they're only discovered late. Yes, there's some dishonesty and some negligence, but also some things that just could not have been foreseen or planned for. Hell, sometimes it's a shit estimate because of the voters: they want it done but they don't want to pay for it, so insufficient planning is done (due to lack of funds for doing so) and the resulting issues are left to be worked out in production.

    It's not just a government problem, as it happens in industry as well.

    I can't find it right now, but recently read an article about how much costs can balloon depending on where in the project lifecycle unexpected problems are discovered, and it was something like exponential in function of project stage. It was a very reasonable factor 2x if it's discovered early in planning, but if it's near the end of the project then it's significantly larger due to the whole project having to stop, reevaluate, rewind, retool, restart, etc...

  56. electric copters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not electric multi-rotors instead ? Would make a good extension to what Tesla is already doing for cars.

  57. Re:He'll need to go deep & fast by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    "My 1-2 metre/day was based on the first generation borers used in Toronto about ten years ago. "

    Boring machines have gotten more exciting since then.

  58. Enginners by spongman · · Score: 1

    The London yellow pages used to have an entry "Boring, see: engineers"

  59. Hahahaha by tsotha · · Score: 1

    It must be nice to have so much money you can say "Fuck it. I'm tired of driving around this mountain and I'm going to have it moved."

  60. We are not in territory... by CAOgdin · · Score: 1

    ...where Elon Musk does not know how much he doesn't know. Believe me, unless he's "boring" down 1 KM or so, he's going to have HUGE problems with existing infrastructure (not pipes, so much as pilings and things that hold up large buildings). And, there's no central compilation of those details that have been installed over the past 50 years!

    Boring may be what he bends his pick on :-)

  61. Nuclear Subterrene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's resurrecting research from LANL/RAND for a nuclear subterrene, which is basically an extremely hot and wide straw that melts it's way through rock, and breaks up the center rock tube like a deli meat slicer.

  62. Yeah, I kinda got that back when by jpellino · · Score: 1

    I worked in Mary Gates Hall at UW. I don't care if his money is old or new. He's keeping people from dying while Musk is whining about his commute.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  63. Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Preparing/studying for underground Mars colony most likely reason for this new venture

  64. Re:Elon is a genius!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This one is on the house.

  65. Re: Traffic is still traffic by billdale · · Score: 0

    Uggggh... what a troll! Musk has landed four gigantic booster rockets on barges floating at sea... 3-D prints his rocket motors for a tiny fraction of the cost of traditional CNC... is cranking out tens of thousands of EVs a, month with nearly a half-million orders WITH deposits for his Model 3--- makes 7-passenger, FULLY AUTONOMOUS SEDANS that can outrun the world's fastest ICE cars, and do so with nearly 100mpge efficiency--- and you are foolish enough to think he will create a TRAFFIC PROBLEM? You ARE joshing, right?

  66. Bore the shit out of $City by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

    You know, if they ever dig any tunnels to help a city's water treatment plants, they could say "We bore the shit outta Cleveland".

  67. how about this, Mr musk: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Build railroads. And in the meantime make all Teslas form convois that block the roads for combustion engine vehicles.

  68. don't be boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take LA to the next level. Build new streets above the existing streets. The old streets will be the new tunnels and the city will be flood proof.

  69. Investing != doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First one post about how Zuckerberg "built" an AI assistant for his house. Now Musk is going to "build" a tunnel-boring machine...

    I wonder at which point in time did these rich assholes decide they deserve the credit for doing something, when all they did was decide that someone else should be paid for actually doing it...