Hacker News Reader

Comment by twblalock | Hacker News Reader

It's not about capacity. It's about convenience.

Subway systems are absolutely useless unless the stations are spaced very close together and there are other means of transit from the station to where you want to go. There is no point taking the subway when you need to walk several miles from the station to your ultimate destination.

There are only a handful of cities in the United States dense enough for a useful subway plus local transit system to make sense. New York is one. Chicago is borderline. Los Angeles is far too spread out for such a system to work.

On the other hand, if I can turn my car into a subway train and then get out of the tunnel and drive to where I want to go, that's actually useful.

View on HN

> It's not about capacity. It's about convenience. Subway systems are absolutely useless unless the stations are spaced very close together and there are other means of transit from the station to where you want to go

Sooo... How is Musks' solution different? It's absolutely useless unless you have entry and exit points spaced very close together and there are means of transit from the exit point to where you want to go. You basically create chokepoints at each of those entries and exits.

Why not do "the stations are spaced very close together and there are other means of transit from the station to where you want to go." Scooters and bikes are a great way to do the latter.

> Why not do "the stations are spaced very close together and there are other means of transit from the station to where you want to go." Scooters and bikes are a great way to do the latter.

No they are not. Scooters and bikes are a great way to arrive at your destination sweaty, and you are at great risk of being run over by cars.

Multi-modal transportation only works if your coworkers don't care what you smell like.

I won't take public transit unless it's more convenient than driving a car. Nor will most other sane people. Even in the countries with the best public transit, nobody uses it when it is more convenient to drive. It's wonderful for dense cities and it's worthless everywhere else. By "dense" I mean London, Paris, and Tokyo. Once you get even 10 miles outside the centers of those cities you will find that driving is better, and that's what people do.

Are we talking about elonholes outside of cities now? I thought we were talking about cities.

The scooters I'm talking about are electric so you won't sweat. e-bikes are also a thing and they are becoming more of a thing. Finally, I'm sorry you feel uncomfortable around people. Not everyone does and for the most part public transit smelling is a meme that doesn't square most of the time.

> Multi-modal transportation only works if your coworkers don't care what you smell like.

It works when the city has embraced it. E.g., in Sweden most workplaces have showers.

> No they are not. Scooters and bikes are a great way to arrive at your destination sweaty, and you are at great risk of being run over by cars.

> Multi-modal transportation only works if your coworkers don't care what you smell like.

This makes sense if we're talking _today_ in cities such as LA, however if you look at biking-friendly cities such as Amsterdam or Stockholm, it's not really the case at all.

I'd go so far as to say that, in my experience, biking to work is as common (or even more?) as driving to work in central Stockholm, and the sweat problem you're talking about is really non-existing.

Why not both? He's got money to spend.

He's free to do whatever. Governments shouldn't shell out money to give to him because his solution isn't one.

Why not? If he can convince a government panel that he can give them some value for their money, then it makes sense to "shell out money" (very persuasive language there - I approve) to him.

It's not free money. He has to give some value back.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com