Slashdot Mirror


'Elon Musk's Hyperloop Is Doomed For the Worst Reason' (bloomberg.com)

schwit1 quotes a Bloomberg column by Virginia Postrel: What makes Musk's Hyperloop plan seem like fantasy isn't the high-tech part. Shooting passengers along at more than 700 miles per hour seems simple -- engineers pushed 200 miles-per-hour in a test this week -- compared to building a tunnel from New York to Washington. And even digging that enormously long tunnel -- twice as long as the longest currently in existence -- seems straightforward compared to navigating the necessary regulatory approvals... The eye-rolling comes less from the technical challenges than from the bureaucratic ones.

With his premature declaration, Musk is doing public debate a favor. He's reminding us of what the barriers to ambitious projects really are: not technology, not even money, but getting permission to try. "Permits harder than technology," Musk tweeted after talking with Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti about building a tunnel network. That's true for the public sector as well as the private... SpaceX and its commercial-spaceflight competitors can experiment because Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to protect them from Federal Aviation Administration standards. usk is betting that his salesmanship will have a similar effect on the ground. He's trying to get the public so excited that the political pressures to allow the Hyperloop to go forward become irresistible. He seems to believe that he can will the permission into being. If he succeeds, he'll upend not merely intercity transit but the bureaucratic process by which things get built. That would be a true science-fiction scenario.

42 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. I know right by tylersoze · · Score: 5, Insightful

    God forbid there should be some oversight in building a ground level supersonic transport system.

    1. Re:I know right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Some" is hardly what is going on here. Current regulations are smothering innovation.

      From the article "SpaceX and its commercial-spaceflight competitors can experiment because Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to protect them from Federal Aviation Administration standards." Something similar could be done here.

    2. Re:I know right by hord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My uncle is a civil engineer that was asked to work on a show about the Hoover Dam. He said it couldn't be built today due to regulatory approval. It's weird how people aren't saying no oversight... they're saying reasonable oversight. We get stuff like Hoover Dam.

    3. Re:I know right by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, let's see the details on what exactly those unsurmountable regulations are. The article contains zero detail on the specifics.

      Depending on what Musk intends to do, and where his stuff is going to go, and in what manner, it being unsurmountable may be perfectly reasonable. Or it may be not.

    4. Re:I know right by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't imagine why people think that "move fast and break things" isn't a suitable standard for civil engineering. Must be communist influences.

    5. Re:I know right by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 2

      By definition, that cannot happen. Only after tech X lets us do something new can we start studying the impact of doing that thing. It can take years to decide whether we SHOULD do X and, if so, how to SAFELY do X. And that's before you consider the people whose lives are embedded in the current tech -- disruption is nice, but better for people when we can provide a transition period.

      You might find interesting reading looking at Amish procedures for deciding whether to adopt new technology. There's a whole protocol for deciding how it should work. Not my cup of tea, but at least it is a framework for technology adoption... maybe something like it would work more broadly?

    6. Re:I know right by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's important to note that Musk's tweet was related to his desire to build a bunch of tunnels under LA rather than about the coast-to-coast hype loop.

      Musk is used to running companies where they iterate fast and solve problems as they come up; but that doesn't seem like a good approach when it comes to digging tunnels under a populated and developed area.

      In the Seattle area, we've seen a lot of tunnel digging over the past several years (the best known had lots of well-publicised problems, but there have been several others which were mostly problem-free). The thing is... you're digging under skyscrapers, you're digging under bridges, you're digging under the permanent waterline, you're digging through man-made hills with neighborhoods built on top of them... there's a lot that can and does go wrong, and there's not much margin for error.

      While it's currently fashionable to rail against "unreasonable" and "insurmountable" regulations - the burden of proof here should be on the people complaining.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:I know right by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hydro electric power used to be one of the darlings of the energy sector. It was clean, it was safe, it was renewable. The only draw back was the local environmental effects of the dam, changing the river flow, creating a lake; but those were deemed acceptable.

      Now the environmental damage caused by building a dam is an all but insurmountable hurdle.

      Not to mention labour costs and standards increases that price such megaprojects out of reach.

      Oh... you probably wanted some cites right?

      https://www.marketplace.org/20...

      http://wizbangblog.com/2012/07...

      http://thehill.com/regulation/...

    8. Re:I know right by Balial · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why would you want to build another hoover dam today? California produces more than twice the power from the hoover dam from wind. 96 people died in the construction of the hoover dam.

      It's almost as if technology changes adjust the cost/benefit of various projects, obsoleting once acceptable ideas.

      To bring it back to the article: Digging vast tunnels under major metropolitan areas like LA, New York and DC without any oversight is ridiculous.

    9. Re:I know right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, let's see the details on what exactly those unsurmountable regulations are.

      "Insurmountable regulations" is just another way of saying "You won't allow us to maximize our profits by completely ignoring the safety of others". it is essentially the same as the currently popular phrase "job-killing regulations" which is repeated thousands of times daily despite zero evidence that any regulation has ever "killed" any jobs.

      When you buy food at your local grocery store you have never once worried that it would make you sick. When you turn on your television you have never once worried that it would explode and burn down your house. Plane crashes and bridges collapsing are so rare that they are a big story when they happen. You live a live that is very safe and comfortable and it's because of all those terrible regulations.

      But don't worry. Der Trumpenfuhrer will fix all that. He has vowed to eliminate all those terrible regulations. And when Elon Musk's hyperlloop damages your property, you''l just have to suck it up and stop being such a cry-baby liberal.

    10. Re:I know right by plopez · · Score: 2

      You forgot "lack of free flowing river to dam". The western US for all practical reasons has no capacity left. Also horribly expensive. See this abstract and note that their model *excludes* inflation, substantial debt servicing, environmental, and social costs.

      Dams are scams

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    11. Re:I know right by vtcodger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a little surprised that musk doesn't seem to have anticipated the regulatory issue. More important, he doesn't seem to be familiar with Seattle's tunneling effort in its attempt to replace the Alaska Way Viaduct. That (expensive) project is WAY over budget and WAY late due largely to encountering a steel pipe where it didn't expect one. The pipe broke the boring machine which then required a secondary hole/tunnel be drilled to get access to the damaged machinery. Boring tunnels in modern urban areas is a lot more complex than folks (including Musk?) think.

      The other big relatively recent urban tunneling effort in the US was Boston's Big Dig which also was way late and way over budget. I think it was a "dig a huge ditch, put a transportation tube at the bottom then fill over it operation" not a tunnel bore. But here's a quote from Wikipedia.

      In addition to political and financial difficulties, the project faced several environmental and engineering obstacles. The downtown area through which the tunnels were to be dug was largely landfill, and included existing Red Line and Blue Line subway tunnels as well as innumerable pipes and utility lines that would have to be replaced or moved. Tunnel workers encountered many unexpected geological and archaeological barriers, ranging from glacial debris to foundations of buried houses and a number of sunken ships lying within the reclaimed land.

      Tunneling through urban areas does not seem to be a project for the faint of heart.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    12. Re:I know right by hord · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They didn't have wind turbines back when it was built. Why don't you use period-appropriate arguments. We are talking about regulatory hurdles preventing the creation of infrastructure which people complain about almost non-stop. My point is that we might be preventing the building of better infrastructure today because we are afraid of the environmental costs. What about the loss of benefit to society?

    13. Re:I know right by knightghost · · Score: 2

      So dig deeper. Go under all the pipes and load bearing areas.

    14. Re:I know right by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Meh. If everything goes fine, that just proves that regulation is unnecessarily burdensome. If not; it's just "disrupting legacy infrastructure", and the investors love that. Can't lose!

    15. Re:I know right by mikael · · Score: 2

      My guess is that he should be doing what Singapore did decades ago. Build a GIS map of all pipes, cables, conduits, sewers, concrete blocks, boulders and anything else underground. Then use that data for his projects, sell it to others and use it get utility companies to coordinate their work so that the same road doesn't get dug up several times.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    16. Re: I know right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really, the infrastructure that's failing id's mostly decades past the point when they planned to replace it.

      What they failed to plan for was future politicians cutting taxes for the wealthy and not having money for maintenance and replacement.

    17. Re:I know right by colin_young · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, that information does exist.

      And sometimes it's even accurate.

    18. Re:I know right by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3

      It's probably more to do with not running into other stuff buried underground than safety or environmental issues.

      The industry I work in (water) obviously has a lot of buried infrastructure, mostly pipes. They don't know exactly where a lot of it is... There are maps, many of them more than a century old, hand drawn and based on landmarks that don't exist any more. Probably weren't drafted with any great accuracy anyway.

      Okay, so you go deeper. Everyone is deeper than the last project.... Well, that doesn't really work either. And in any case, if you dig a tunnel under a building, you might affect that building in some way. Depends how tall it is, what the foundations are made of, what the ground under it is made of etc.

      That's why there are regulations. We found out the hard way that digging tunnels under cities carries some risks that we really need to try to mitigate.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re:I know right by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      When you buy food at your local grocery store you have never once worried that it would make you sick. When you turn on your television you have never once worried that it would explode and burn down your house. Plane crashes and bridges collapsing are so rare that they are a big story when they happen. You live a live that is very safe and comfortable and it's because of all those terrible regulations.

      Grocery stores would poison you, electronics companies would burn your house down, and airlines would be crashing their own planes if it were not for regulations. Because, those activities are so profitable?

      Remind me not to get help from you the next time I'm writing a business plan.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  2. You mean ... by thadtheman · · Score: 2

    there are too many regulations getting in the way?

    1. Re:You mean ... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. That's what Uber did, and people HATE them.

      If people hated Uber, then why are they all using it?

      It's the bureaucrats and the medallion owners they protect who hate Uber.

  3. Says who by mattwarden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Huh? My eyes roll for the technical challenges.

    1. Re:Says who by intellitech · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, the tunnel length alone. And then it needs to be almost airtight?

      Technical difficulty will far outweigh the bureaucratic difficulty.

      --
      vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
    2. Re:Says who by gweihir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And that is just it. Europe and Asia have high-speed rail systems. They were really expensive. Don't you think alternatives were not looked at? Oh, wait, they were, for example the Transrapid. Turns out the alternatives are not commercially viable and are technologically problematic.

      My take here is the Musk has some inkling that he will fail on the tech side and is preparing a smokescreen. And, I have to admit, it is an excellent smokescreen as getting the permits needed here may well be infeasible as well.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. Ok then by sunking2 · · Score: 2

    We should just give away all the land rights to the public lands and allow him to take any private by eminent domain. The local populace should have no recourse if its something Musk wants.

  5. Longest tunnel? by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

    Who ever said that the hyperloop will be a tunnel from start to finish? Hyperloop works just as well above ground on concrete pylons. Going alongside highways, through farmland and even going over existing roads is perfectly possible with an elevated hyperloop.

    At the end of the day hyperloop can't have any steep gradients or changes of direction. It'll be tunnels when passing through hills or mountains, and above ground when they land is low lying.

    Similar to railways in that it's mixed above ground and tunnels. Only more so because changes of direction need to be minimised much more.

    There will not be one long tunnel.

  6. Useless article by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Damn straight permits are needed. Because even the biggest Elon Musk advocate would be screaming bloody murder if they found the Hyperloop would pass right through their living room, their farm, or that really scenic lake on their property.

    The question is then what permits, and are they bullshit or not? Some permits exist for obscure reasons, some because some things involve other people's property, some for safety reasons, and some because people get pissy when heavy earth moving equipment shows up in their backyard.

    Yes, of course before cities were built and when people were just moving into America, there weren't such problems, because there wasn't a crapload of infrastructure and settled people to object. But you can't have those times back, unless you like the idea of completely unrestrained forfeiture where you can be kicked out of your home to make room for a mall, and companies building housing that's going to sink into the ground in a decade or two.

  7. Not quite... by YuppieScum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is with the regulators, not the regulations.

    Bureaucrats - and politicians - of every stripe want their fingers in big projects, partly for the reflected kudos and partly for the perks. The "working lunches" at your expense to iron out some sort of "paperwork glitch", permit fees, consultancy fees, introduction fees, and the bigger the project, the stickier their fingers...

    I think Musk's approach of shining a BIG spotlight on the process is to try and keep these "public servants" honest. I hope it works...

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  8. Also Doomed For the Best Reason by DalM · · Score: 2

    Permits for ultra-major construction project like this are very important. Really, for gawd sakes. Those "permits" are to enforce measures in silly laws like the Clean Water Act. Do you want to live in a nation where anyone with money is just allowed to do whatever they want where ever they want to? Permits are dang important.

    1. Re:Also Doomed For the Best Reason by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

      What's sad is - there are people who think the Clean Water Act constitutes government overreach.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  9. Not science fiction by HangingChad · · Score: 2

    That would be a true science-fiction scenario.

    And yet that's exactly what Uber has done. Anyone looking at that business model in March of 2009 would have said that their hurdles were more regulatory than technological. Uber basically bullied its way through taxi regulations, one major city at a time.

    It's a mistake to underestimate Elon Musk.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  10. Need better mass transit however it's done by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the last century, a short-sighted if not outright evil power broker by the name of Robert Moses, never elected to any post, directly planned the transport system of New York city and the state around it, and vastly influenced the planning of other cities.

    One of Mr. Moses' nasty feats was to specify that all of the parkway bridges be built so low that it would be impossible to run trains under them, even though many were built with broad center islands.

    I grew up in one of the towns under his thumb. We literally had a 100-year-old railroad system that only went to one station for 3 large communities, with 100-year-old bridges, etc. No new train construction since New York's subways in the '30's and '40's, but lots of new roads for cars.

    America's cities still suffer under the dead hand of Robert Moses and people like him, who actively wiped out our railroads, never considering the problems automobiles would bring.

    Elon Musk's hyperloop is not the solution for this. The speed, confinement, and vacuum are obvious problems that make it more of a bomb than a train. But conventional high-speed rail transport is the solution.

    Most americans never spend time in Europe and learn about really good trains. Try Switzerland and you won't understand why people even want cars.

    1. Re:Need better mass transit however it's done by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Actually, trains solve EITHER the problem of moving freight or the problem of moving people.

      You clearly do not understand how a modern railway network is constructed. Or alternatively, the Europeans must have magic, because they use it for both at the same time. Clearly the darkest of witchcraft is at work here.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  11. The article makes what would be a valid argument by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    in a world where you could put eight miles of new subway line in a major city without checking to see what's there first. But after hundreds of years of development, most without the benefit of geographic information systems, you can't be certain what kind of weird shit (or people) down there.

    The author seems shocked that it'd take ten years of planning before you could start workers digging. The reality is you need to figure out the impact on water, sewer, gas, electricity, telecom, peoples basements -- and chances are none of that stuff is all on one map; a lot of it is likely not mapped at all, or mapped incorrectly. Ten years before your break ground seems very reasonable to me.

    Likewise he's mortified that the Chesapeake Bay Tunnel project had to spend two years on geological and environmental impact studies before breaking ground. That's a twenty-three mile long complex of causeways and tunnels across the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay, one of the most important fisheries in the country as well one of the world's busiest shipping routes. Two years of study! He calls this a "run-of-the-mill highway". Sure, anything seems easy if you no abso-frickin' nothing about engineering. Bridges and tunnels are the most prestigious projects for a civil engineer to work on because they're ridiculously complex. Just look at all the pieces of the thing. Two years of preliminary geological and environmental study to build the thing sounds outstanding.

    This is just Dunning-Kruger run amok. These aren't cases of preliminary studies holding back engineering. Assessing the feasibility and impact of a project is a *major part* of civil engineering. Sure, you could start digging and hope you don't rupture a gas line, breech a high pressure water main, start a plague of rats in Manhattan's Upper East Side (average annual income $180K), damage a fishery that that brings in 290 million dollars per year, or find out the soil you're tunneling through won't support the weight above it. And then you'd be forced to stop and figure out how to fix it. In fact you'd almost inevitably be forced to stop and redesign your project.

    A basic principle of engineering project management is that it's waaay cheaper to anticipate a problem than to figure out what to do about it when you're halfway done.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  12. Re:Slashdot will tell him by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

    Regulators could have specific, written requirements and definite timetables.

    They already do. The most frequent reason permits are denied are the applicants not complying with those timetables. "What do you mean I actually have to have the geological report before I get a permit to build the foundation?!?!"

    And they could be limited to 2 layers at most: State and Federal

    Because fuck the locals and what they want.

    Your house is really, really unimportant to your state, and barely acknowledged by the Federal government. Your ability to affect your state and Federal government is basically zero. So when someone wants to level it for their infrastructure dream, you should happily accept he loss, right?

    The reason cities and counties do the bulk of regulations like this is because those governments are actually responsive to their electorate. At higher levels, you can just say "fuck you" to a large swath of the electorate and still win.

  13. Technical Challenges by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's the vid, so everyone knows what we're talking about:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... He's made others since, but that's the first and most comprehensive. TL:DW technical challenges:

    * The tube would be the largest vacuum chamber in the world.
    * Any maintenance whatsoever in the tube requires depressurization and shutting down the line.
    * Vacuum seals must work repeatedly and reliably for passenger loading and unloading.
    * If a vehicle dies out in the field, it's unclear how they plan to evacuate passengers from either the vehicle or the sealed, elevated steel tube.
    * The tube has to deal with steel expansion in the daytime. The total expected variance (for the 370-mile California route) is three football fields, so you need lots of expansion joints (unless your loading platforms and pylons are going to be incredibly mobile), all of which must also be vacuum sealed. Also keep in mind the sun hits only the top of the tube so the expansion won't be uniform.
    * A breach in the system is likely to be catastrophic, with a torrent of air rushing in and propelling the first vehicle it hits at great speed into the next one, since there's no air cushion between the vehicles.
    * Anyone with a rifle along the impossible-to-guard 370-mile tube can cause one of those failures by penetrating the inch-thick steel.

    If these crushing technical challenges have been addressed, please do give us a link, because so far it looks a lot like solar roadways or Onlive.

    1. Re:Technical Challenges by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Insightful

      * The tube would be the largest vacuum chamber in the world.

      And? So it would set a record. So what? On its own, that fact is meaningless.

      * Any maintenance whatsoever in the tube requires depressurization and shutting down the line.

      Overstated. Some types of maintenance would require depressurization and shutting down the line. Others would not. In particular, none of the required maintenance on the vehicles that traverse the tube requires depressurizing anything but the airlock already in hourly usage anyway. You take them out of the tube, perform maintenance, and put them back. For tube maintenance, you shut down. Consider it a snow day at an airport in the northeast, or a heat wave at an airport in Phoenix, except predictable and scheduled. No big deal. (And incidentally, completely impervious to snow.)

      * Vacuum seals must work repeatedly and reliably for passenger loading and unloading.

      Yes. And? Is this impossible? I doubt it. Does it require some engineering work? Yes. That work can be done.

      * If a vehicle dies out in the field, it's unclear how they plan to evacuate passengers from either the vehicle or the sealed, elevated steel tube.

      Unclear, but any idiot can imagine adding access ports to the tube at intervals, including removable sections large enough to allow removal of a failed vehicle. It's amazing what you can do with hydraulics.

      * The tube has to deal with steel expansion in the daytime. The total expected variance (for the 370-mile California route) is three football fields, so you need lots of expansion joints (unless your loading platforms and pylons are going to be incredibly mobile), all of which must also be vacuum sealed. Also keep in mind the sun hits only the top of the tube so the expansion won't be uniform.

      So it will have expansion joints. A two and a half foot expansion joint every mile would do it. Since it's not a very hard vacuum, designing an adequate expansion joint is entirely possible. I would build them much less than every mile and make them quite large, and double up the design as being both an expansion joint and the aforementioned rescue access. As for uniformity of expansion, steel is a very very good thermal conductor. The difference in expansion is negligible.

      * A breach in the system is likely to be catastrophic, with a torrent of air rushing in and propelling the first vehicle it hits at great speed into the next one, since there's no air cushion between the vehicles.

      Ridiculous. Railroads have had rail integrity sensing for decades now. The system requires both integrity sensors and pressure sensors along its entire length anyway. It's not like there's one giant vacuum pump at the end, with only one sensor. These are both safety and operational features. A breach in the system is a nonevent. It can be detected in a matter of seconds, and the information broadcast to all capsules in danger (a steel tube is basically a wave guide, making communication dirt simple), which can automatically engage emergency braking systems, which mainly means retracting the air skid pylons and letting the capsule drop onto its wheels. The wheel bearings will be ruined and have to be replaced, but the capsule will stop safely.

      * Anyone with a rifle along the impossible-to-guard 370-mile tube can cause one of those failures by penetrating the inch-thick steel.

      Uhm, no. Just no. Inch-thick steel is effectively armor. Very very good armor. You can legally buy armor-penetrating large caliber rifle ammunition in the United States (because 'Murica! Fuck yeah!) and while it does put a divot into inch thick steel, it does not penetrate. At all. Plenty of video on Youtube demonstrating. That lunatic in Texas tried it with all manne

    2. Re:Technical Challenges by vtcodger · · Score: 2

      Aside from which, the NYC-Washington DC proposal is for a tunnel, not an above ground tube. Temps underground at any depth sufficient to miss sewers, data cables, water mains, old basements, etc, etc, etc are pretty stable.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
  14. Not the Spin They're Looking For by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But don't worry. Der Trumpenfuhrer will fix all that. He has vowed to eliminate all those terrible regulations. And when Elon Musk's hyperlloop damages your property, you''l just have to suck it up and stop being such a cry-baby liberal.

    TFS:

    SpaceX and its commercial-spaceflight competitors can experiment because Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to protect them from Federal Aviation Administration standards.

    If anything, when the overhyped and unworkable Hyperloop goes nowhere (based on its own merits), this sounds like a pretense to spin the failure as "Thanks Trump."

  15. Re:Slashdot will tell him by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

    And it's not "fuck" anyone. But someone needs to give a final yes or no on a project rather than 50 different boards and groups and courts saying "no"

    By elevating the decision to a level totally unresponsive to local issues, it is fuck a lot of people.

    My state was hit by a hurricane. Two counties were heavily damaged by flooding. You'd think it would be a quick, no-brainer deal to rebuild the damaged bridges and provide some funding from the state, right?

    It's been two years. Still no funding. Because only one state Senate and two state Assembly districts care. The counties don't have a lot of people so statewide offices don't care. The counties are rural and poor, so the other state senators and assemblypeople don't have any economic benefit from it. Instead, it's just a loss for their constituents to pay for it.

    This is for rebuilding after a natural disaster, one of the easiest things to build support for. You're now proposing the same people who can not get that done are the ones to decide whether or not your drinking water supply is destroyed because someone wants to dig through it. How would that work out? Well, this actually came up at the state level. Turns out the state is quite happy for the electric utility to dump toxic ash into the drinking water supply. It was only stopped when the locals sued the state. And if you want a smooth approval process, the locals having to resort to lawsuits is not the way to get it.

    You know there are specific rules for that, right? The rules protect the property owner while allowing things to get built.

    See above example about drinking water supply. Guess why the locals won the lawsuit? State decided to not follow the rules. They decided to not follow the rules because it would not hurt their re-election campaign while the large donations from the utility would help their re-election campaign.

    I don't care about the specific process, but are you really arguing against an orderly, rules-based process with a definite timeline?

    As I mentioned in my original reply, there already is an orderly rules-based process with a definite timeline. When the builder doesn't want to follow those rules or the timeline, they claim it's just some local politician "flexing their muscle" instead of not following the rules and process that were already in place.

    That story sells quite well to people not familiar with the specific instance being discussed, and so it becomes one of those things "everybody knows".

  16. Umm.... not so much.... by King_TJ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since when does Elon Musk strike you as a crazy man who cares about profits above all else, and wants to sacrifice anything having to do with safety to better his bottom line?

    The slow, careful roll-out of the self-driving mode in the Tesla should make it pretty clear that's not how this guy operates. He was working on all of that BEFORE government could get around to regulating it -- and he still managed to do a pretty responsible job of deploying the tech.

    The thing all of the liberals seem to ignore, with the "Government needs to protect us all from our own foolishness!" mantra is that government itself is just made up of more people like the rest of us. Many of them with the most power and say-so are individuals who rose up the ranks inside government because they wanted only to better themselves at the expense of anyone else in their way. There's no reason to trust them with our safety any more than trusting anyone else with it!

    What businesses have in their favor as motivation to do things safely is this: It's TERRIBLE for profits and the bottom line if you keep killing off your best customers.

    Government agencies and regulators, by contrast, can often just say "Oops.... we screwed up. We take back our earlier promise that X was safe." They usually get to keep their jobs afterwards and families of those who died have little recourse.

    Right now, I live out here in Maryland watching the whole project to add another line to the DC metro system. It's a huge undertaking that's costing taxpayers millions of dollars, just for a system that will cost users quite a bit just to ride on it afterwards as it loses money annually, as it always has. Entire blocks of successful businesses had to be shut down and moved to new locations for it, among other things. And ultimately, what do we get for it? A way to travel another 16.2 miles, total, if you happen to have a need to travel between a handful of designated stations in Prince George's County and Bethesda where it will terminate.

    I can't help but think I'd be much MORE excited to see effort in digging tunnels and installing new infrastructure for something like the HyperLoop -- that promises to get people between much more distant points at far greater speed than was possible previously. The rail system in America feels woefully outdated, just like our land line copper wire phone system does today. What was once a great achievement has just stagnated since then.

    Government doesn't make me feel safer at all, most of the time. Chipotle restaurant chains out here keep getting dozens of people sick and government hasn't done a damn thing to fix that yet. Meanwhile, they DO hurt small business owners like my neighbor who was trying to run his own BBQ business on weekends, serving food in front of microbreweries and at town events, etc. They pulled his permit because somebody called in to complain they saw him bringing in some food that was prepared off-site (back at his house in the kitchen), instead of preparing all of it right where he was selling it. I get why they have that rule, but practically-speaking? It was just needless harassment. The guy ran out of something and his wife was able to fix up some more for him back in the house, so he wouldn't disappoint customers who wanted it. If I trust his food enough to eat it at some event, I trust it just as much if he had to drive a mile or two back home to get it from there first.