
Elon Musk Unveils Boring Co's First Tunnel - gamblor956
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-elon-musk-tunnel-20181218-story.html
======
ZeljkoS
Version of article that can be viewed from EU:
[https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/19/elon-musk-unveils-boring-
com...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/19/elon-musk-unveils-boring-company-
tunnel.html)

LA Times version says: "Not available in your region"

~~~
strainer
Thats a different article. The LA times one discussed is archived here:
[http://archive.is/VcFEe](http://archive.is/VcFEe)

------
skywhopper
> "Still, the $10 million is orders of magnitude lower than a typical subway
> project, Musk said."

Umm, and the capacity of these tunnels is also orders of magnitude lower than
a subway. It would also be a lot harder to use and available to far fewer
people. This entire idea should be laughed out of existence, but despite
everything, Musk still gets fawning coverage for any crazy idea he spouts.

Maintenance will be impossible. Breakdowns of any sort would go from being
annoyances to a few to being catastrophic failures for the system. Even if the
tunnels never degraded, even if no car ever had a flat tire in the middle of
the tunnel, and even if you could actually achieve 150mph (which would be
extremely unpleasant for the passengers anyway), you couldn't physically fit
enough cars through the tunnel to compare to real transit system. Given that
this thing requires rigging something up to your vehicle, the onload and
offload points would immediately become major bottlenecks to any serious
throughput even if you could cram them in bumper to bumper.

~~~
Tuna-Fish
> Umm, and the capacity of these tunnels is also orders of magnitude lower
> than a subway.

Even assuming that capacity/dollar is actually worse than subways, they can
still be economically superior, for the same reason solar+battery is beating
nuclear. The ability to incrementally build capacity relatively quickly and
with relatively low, incremental costs beats any system that requires billions
of initial investment and only comes online in the timescale of decades.

And I really don't think that capacity/dollar will be worse than subways,
assuming that he intends to build off-ramps for leaving the system, as alluded
to in the stream. Simply removing the need to stop at every exit greatly
improves capacity, and while the capacity of an individual tunnel is still
much worse than a single subway tunnel, they can just build more.

> Maintenance will be impossible. Breakdowns of any sort would go from being
> annoyances to a few to being catastrophic failures for the system. Even if
> the tunnels never degraded, even if no car ever had a flat tire in the
> middle of the tunnel, and even if you could actually achieve 150mph (which
> would be extremely unpleasant for the passengers anyway), you couldn't
> physically fit enough cars through the tunnel to compare to real transit
> system.

You seem to be assuming a single tunnel per direction. Assume 20 instead.
Suddenly a car failing in the tunnel turns from a catastrophic failure into
one that causes some traffic to have to take a little extra time as they back
their way to the closest cross-tunnel, and a relatively minor loss of capacity
until a recovery vehicle can come pull the broken one out.

And as Musk said like a dozen times in the stream, he intends to match a real
transit system not by increasing capacity per tunnel, but by starting building
tunnels and then not stopping until there are no more traffic issues. Since he
gets to expand in three dimensions, he can just stack them on top of each
other.

> Given that this thing requires rigging something up to your vehicle, the
> onload and offload points would immediately become major bottlenecks to any
> serious throughput even if you could cram them in bumper to bumper.

Their demo had the "subway wheels" deploy automatically, while in the
elevator. For high-throughput exits, they probably need to bite the bullet and
just build off-ramps.

~~~
icanhackit
> You seem to be assuming a single tunnel per direction. Assume 20 instead.

I think this is the really important part. Think of it like a computer bus -
do you want a single channel able to move a lot of data at once but with
potential bottlenecks as various systems fight to talk to each other, or lots
of channels able to move medium amounts of data without bottlenecking one
component while favouring another?

When one channel is at capacity you move to the next, with further redundancy
to spare.

------
konschubert
If they manage to reduce the cost of tunnel boring then that's super exciting
and I congratulate them.

But all this discussion of what to put in the tunnel seems very silly to me.
Are they just re-discovering subways? Do they know that there are subways in
the world (e.g. Paris) that run out rubber tires?

~~~
jillesvangurp
Tunneling is currently so expensive that there are few companies doing any
innovation on how to properly utilize them. A big part of the problem is
actually digging them in a way that is cheap and scaleable. Another part of
the problem is the organizations doing the digging and doing the exploitation
are typically have misaligned incentives and goals.

For example, expanding subway systems is currently in the hands of very badly
run semi government institutions who are arguably quite bad at even utilizing
the tunnels they have. E.g. the new york subway system is famously less
efficient than ever due to the fact that they keep reducing the speed at which
trains travel through it. Digging new tunnels is relatively rare for them; and
when they do dig new tunnels, they tend to just use them exactly the same way
as their existing tunnels, which is not very efficiently. Also, like most
government infrastructure projects, progress is slow and things tend to go way
over budget.

Musk's approach is twofold: 1) turn tunnel digging into a scaleable business.
2) provide concrete things to do with these tunnels that are not backwards and
stupid that he can sell. For example, if you have autonomous vehicles, you
don't need a lot of expensive infrastructure inside the tunnels to get from A
to B. Infrastructure like rails, signaling equipment, power lines for the
trains, etc. It so happens he has a business for autonomous vehicles already.
He sells the whole package. That's why he's emphasizing the use cases.

This is classic Musk, he thinks end to end an he might actually pull it off.

~~~
Luc
You're comparing a difficult but real situation with a perfect but
hypothetical one.

Things always are wonderful when they're research projects that don't need to
conform to real-world limitations.

~~~
dwild
> difficult but real situation

His first argument is that it's currently too expensive to have any
innovation. This tunnel cost 10 millions $. Sure it's usage is still
hypothetical, but you can't say this won't be much more accessible to
innovate.

I'm in Montreal, our subway barely changed in the past 30 years. I was lucky,
I was affected by one of the only change they did in theses 30 years, 3 more
stations on an already completely full line. That came with a 745m$ price for
3 stations that sure allowed people further to take it, but it didn't increase
at all the actual capacity. It's hard for any of our administration to even
consider any major expansion because of that.

If making smaller projects now make sense, maybe we will see more innovation
in the technology, in how they are handled, etc...

~~~
ABCLAW
Maybe I can provide a bit more context re: Montreal.

Montreal's metro throughput is not gated by the tunnel capacity. It is gated
by the amount of trains in operation. Adding additional cars on the 'already
full line' would increase the line's capacity. Neither the orange nor the
green line are close to full.

The issue with the orange line extension isn't that the lines are full. It's
that 1) subway costs are heavily subsidized at the municipal and provicial
level, 2) they were extended to Laval which funds the STL, not the STM, and 3)
there was no revenue or cost sharing agreement between Laval and Montreal to
subsidize the STM in proportion to the burden placed on the STM by Laval
riders.

This issue with cross-subsidization also lies at the core of the municipal
agglomeration which occurred in Quebec metropolitan regions.

Montreal won't consider additional subway expansion not because of financial
and infrastructure cost reasons, but because of political ones, much in the
same way that internal negotiations regarding the dual super-hospital projects
were intentionally sabotaged for political reasons.

------
sschueller
Is this safe? I didn't see any escape paths. What happens if there is a fire
and you are in the sixth tube down?

Electric trains are considered quite safe yet tunnels have a lot of escape
paths and service tunnels built parallel to the main one.

~~~
ardit33
It is not, per general EU regulations no 'single bore' tunnel can be longer
than 1km (0.62miles0. Tunnels that are longer than that, either have to be
double tunnels, with escape doors between them, or one large tunnel and an
emergency smaller one.

This looks the size of a emergency tunnel. Still, the cost of building it
seems pretty low. Boring Co could build two side by side, (one for each
direction) and have emergency hatches between them.

~~~
npunt
Yeah practically I think there’s almost always going to need to be two tunnels
side by side, given density of stations and the need for long distances to
slow vehicles down as they exit from the main tunnel (up to 150mph) to the
stations. It may be that stations wind up quite a bit denser than one every
mile- certain parts of LA could use them every 1/4 mile really.

------
carlivar
Twitter thread on the physics to go 150mph in this tunnel:

[https://twitter.com/Model_4_/status/1075270290978963458?s=19](https://twitter.com/Model_4_/status/1075270290978963458?s=19)

Note that air resistance is a much bigger problem in a cheap, narrow tunnel.

~~~
npunt
I imagine it’ll also probably be hell on tires. You’d need W- or Z-rated tires
to do that and those are $$. Perhaps smooth concrete will mean lower rolling
friction along with lack of sudden maneouvers. Still, going that fast is
expensive in all sorts of ways.

~~~
konschubert
People go 250 kmh on German highways regularly (unfortunately). It doesn't
seem to be unpractical.

~~~
emptyfile
And whats the speed limit in German tunnels? In case you don't care to find
out: 80-100 km/h (50-60 mph)depending on the state.

~~~
konschubert
Yes, but my point was whether the price if the tires is a show stopper or not.

------
keyle
It will come down to cost to build and time to build...

I took 2 tunnels to and from the airport today. Each way, over $10. But I'm
damn glad I took them because they go all the way from north of the city, to
south of the city, including under the river, where our bridges are massive
bottleneck.

I saved at least 30' and a lot of sanity, and this was before work. I'd be
dead tired if I had to deal with traffic jams for 45'.

Heck I'd even chose a bumpy tunnel over the surface.

~~~
sjwright
Sydney?

~~~
nizmow
Sounds a lot like it. I used to commute from Alexandria to the North Shore,
and though I couldn't afford the Eastern Distributor every day, I did like
that it was always there if I was in a hurry to make an appointment or if I
just wanted to treat myself.

------
Tiktaalik
This is the sort of moronic "solution" one arrives at when they're unwilling
to abandon the constraint of car ownership.

------
kilroy123
Are they really boring tunnels cheaper and faster than traditional
construction companies though? Seems like that's the real goal with the
company.

~~~
npunt
Yes, mentioned in live stream was that other co’s only spend 1/5 the time
actually boring and the rest on logistics of putting up retaining walls and
the like. Part of Boring Co innovation is to automate that and keep the borer
working all the time. Also they 3x’d the energy output of the boring machine
vs competitors. Should add up.

~~~
hobofan
That's all still speculation, isn't it? IIRC this tunnel was built with a
boring machine from a competitor.

~~~
npunt
It’s mostly speculation for sure. I forgot what parts were real from the live
stream (the 3x power output was real) but it seemed like this is mostly the
rapid learning and planning stage.

Buying a competitors device is a really smart move as a first step, since much
of the low hanging fruit gains are in the activities around the machine to
save that 4/5s of time when it’s idle. As a startup it’s almost always best to
bootstrap with the competition’s product if you can, makes rate of learning so
much faster.

------
snowwindwaves
The tone of the article is surprisingly hostile. Maybe I'm just used to
Canadian media.

~~~
grecy
American culture has shifted in the last decade to be extremely critical and
scathing towards anyone or anything that attempts to change the status quo -
even if it's an attempt to make things better.

See all the negative comments in this thread, for example.

Instead saying "Jeez, this looks interesting. I'm happy some billionaire is
trying to fix the horrible traffic problem instead of just buying more
McMansions and yatchs. It seems complicated and I'm not sure it will work
because of reason x, y and z, but it will be cool to watch!"

The collective American voice is now: "Stupid! Will never work! Waste of
time!". (And angrily at that)

It's a real shame, because people who genuinely try to make life better for
others are rare, and America needs all of them they can get!

~~~
kurtisc
Elon Musk is hardly starved of hero-worshippers

~~~
grecy
Sure, but what percentage of the US population do you think hero-worship him
vs. what percentage hate his guts?

5/95?

1/99?

~~~
kurtisc
I've not seen anything that would suggest either ratio.

~~~
grecy
So what's your guess?

~~~
danso
Opinion about Elon Musk seems to be polarized in places like HN. Haven't heard
of normal people caring substantively about him, certainly not in a way
describable as "hating his guts".

------
npunt
Worth considering that a single family luxury car is not the only vehicle type
that could be in these tunnels.

Automation allows for all sorts of new options in vehicles. This is a platform
and many services can sit atop it. No reason why people can’t develop a
carpooling service for 6-12 person vans and run those on this. Or services
that travel to clients rather than visa versa.

Also, and very important to the cost argument, is that system cost is offset
by individuals and external services purchasing fleets. This makes it a lot
more practical a transit option to build than typical public transit or
freeway fixes which require multi-year, multi-billion dollar outlays and
consequent decision making apparatus. Consider what properties an ideal
transit option has:

a) easy to add very incremental capacity (vs big long projects)

b) doesn’t have to deal with right of way

c) shares costs with private market & individuals

d) can reach any location point-to-point

e) offers broad access to citizens

Seems this + autonomous fleets serving different market segments and needs has
these properties. If it works.

~~~
twblalock
Why would I take a van if I could take my own luxury car? If I was going to
take a van I might as well take the subway. It would probably be more
comfortable and roomy.

~~~
npunt
If there’s no subway nearby, how would you do that?

Also not everyone can afford a luxury car.

Just imagine lyft, lyft line, and a bigger lyft line. They can all coexist.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
> If there’s no subway nearby, how would you do that?

So here's an idea - how about they run subway trains in these tunnels instead
like they do in the rest of the world?

~~~
dwild
> So here's an idea - how about they run subway trains in these tunnels
> instead like they do in the rest of the world?

So here's an idea, why is there no subway trains there? Easy answers, not
enough money/value into them.

He suggest a way to add value to the system, by allowing luxury cars to go
through them and save traffic time. It's also a way to keep your car before
and after the path, which can't happen in a subway. Theses add values.

Smaller tunnels can also be much more cost effective and can be done in an
iterative way, based on the actual needs of the system. In Montreal (my city)
that's a big issue where we just can't get the funds to improve our subway
system because it's just so much money which is hard to justify. Our
government pension program is currently funding a pretty big improvement in
our transit system because THEY have the funds to do it and it's going to be
profitable to them. They made it profitable to invest into our infrastructure
and yet the freaking government can't do it.

------
warent
> _" But Musk told reporters that Boring officials have abandoned the concept
> of the skate, saying it was “far more complex” than his new plan: guide
> wheels that can be attached to the front tires of autonomous, electric cars,
> steadying the vehicles as they move forward through tunnels."_

So basically this only works with Tesla vehicles at the moment. I'm wondering
how that's going to expand in the future--if at all.

Do they have a standard which other vehicle manufacturers are expected to
include in their car designs to be compatible with these tunnels?

This is making me question the viability of it, because without buy-in from
manufacturers, it seems seriously unlikely that any government is going to
approve a sprawling Tesla Guide Wheel Tunnel™ network.

~~~
agildehaus
Doesn't the removal of the skate also put the vehicle's speed back in the
hands of the driver? So now one slow guy will slow down everyone in that
tunnel?

Also, the skate was supposed to provide the automation. How does <random EV>
autonomously navigate the tunnel network?

~~~
rsynnott
It's a Musk thing; not sure why you necessarily expect it to make any sense.

------
pdq
The elevators in and elevators out are the bottleneck.

Then inside it looks like a safety and escape hazard nightmare. What happens
when someone gets a flat tire?

~~~
npunt
Seems like it needs to be centrally controlled automation so they’d be able to
adjust fleet speed in relevant area for any issues that arose.

Flat tire seems easy, probably a limp home mode to nearest exit + slow down
nearby fleet. There should be many exits and relatively close to each other
since they’re so low cost.

I’m more concerned about fire & earthquake.

~~~
haxton
Generally speaking tunnels are much safer than outside due to the lack of
falling debris. And the fire issue is solved my any half decent sprinkler /
ventilation system.

~~~
youngtaff
Isn't water a no-go if it's a lithium battery fire?

~~~
MertsA
No, for a battery fire it's quite the opposite. It's going to release all of
that stored energy and burn up the electrolyte one way or another. Flooding it
with water is the best way to deal with all of that energy.

~~~
rini17
Releasing highly flammable hydrogen gas is definitely not "dealing with the
energy". Both electrolysis and the reaction of water with lithium release
plenty of it.

~~~
MertsA
You're mistaken on that. Electrolysis is going to be far too slow to actually
amount to any substantial amount of hydrogen and even if that wasn't the case
burning all of that hydrogen would release only as much energy as it already
took away from the reaction. Burning 100% of the hydrogen produced would still
put you at a net 0 change in energy. For every joule worth of hydrogen that
escaped without burning that's a joule of energy that you no longer have to
deal with. Also it's a shorted out battery pack we're talking about. The
voltage potential isn't going to be anywhere near as high as it would normally
and if it was they you wouldn't have a flaming battery pack in the first
place.

As to the notion that there's lithium metal in the batteries that could react
with the water, you're thinking of non-rechargeable lithium batteries. Lithium
ion cells use a lithium compound, not just pure elemental lithium. The
formulation might be something like LiFePO4 but the point here is that it's
not just lithium metal sitting around inside of it.

Also Tesla has an emergency response guide that includes instructions on
fighting a battery fire. It's on page 22 (23 of the PDF) and it makes it clear
that you want to douse the thing in as much water as possible and keep dousing
it until it's totally gone. Tons of water is exactly what's called for when
fighting these kind of fires.

[https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2016_Mod...](https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2016_Model_S_Emergency_Response_Guide_en.pdf)

------
mrep
Is digging down really cheaper than going up?

Chicago has got an elevated train [0] and even double decker streets [1] and
those don't have lots of the problems that tunnels do like ventilation, escape
tunnels, and moving all the dirt.

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_%22L%22](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_%22L%22)

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacker_Drive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacker_Drive)

~~~
scirocco
But man is that train loud...

------
sibeshk96
One of the things I don't get about this concept is how they plan to avoid the
surface bottleneck - if everyone's trying to get into the same number of
limited holes in the road, then there's more and more congestion and traffic
wanting that access. To make a 3d network of roads work, you'd also need a 3d
network of buildings, other wise it's not really solving any problem.

------
puranjay
The big win from this experiment would be better tunneling technology. The
tunnels and the sled system itself can fail, but if we walk away from this
with tunneling tech that can meet Elon's claims by even 50%, it's a massive
win

------
modeless
The video of the launch event:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GrUJo9ofJg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GrUJo9ofJg)

------
mrarjen
First thing I noticed, why is there a loose hanging cable on the side of the
tunnel, plus how will a slightly taller car fit? Seems there is plenty of work
still to be done.

~~~
garmaine
The goal was to bore the hole, and that's what is being announced. You sure as
hell can't drive in it today.

------
neonate
[http://archive.is/VcFEe](http://archive.is/VcFEe)

~~~
joering2
Or you know, Musk planned this ahead. You want to sell more cars of your
brand? Build their own roads exclusively for them!

~~~
npunt
It’s explicitly not Tesla exclusive. Doubt regs would allow that anyway.

------
jm1234567890
What happens if a car breaks down in the tunnel?

------
p1mrx
Does anyone know the track width? It's more likely to become a global standard
if they picked a nice number in meters.

~~~
kwhitefoot
Why would that be? The nearest thing to a global standard rail gauge is
standard gauge and it isn't a simple number in either SI, 1.435 m, or US
Customary units: 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-
gauge_railway](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-gauge_railway)).

There might already be a standard of some kind that could be used either
directly or as a sub-multiple the same way that European kitchen fitments are
generally 600 mm wide modules.

There is nothing magical about units of measurement, neither SI nor what
Americans persist in calling Imperial (when they mean US Customary or even
worse US Survey Foot).

------
purplezooey
My first thought looking at the pic of the car coming out was geez, the
exhaust fumes must be thick in that room...

~~~
Tuna-Fish
The tunnels will be EV-only.

------
Tiktaalik
What a gong show and waste of everyone's time.

[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1075230308545454080](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1075230308545454080)

How can this man honestly think this sort of system could be higher capacity
than a subway?

~~~
reissbaker
I'm not sure what you're purporting to show other than two people disagreeing
with each other, without providing evidence... Sure, an individual subway car
has "more capacity," but does a subway system have more capacity? For example,
I rarely see BART trains come within five minutes of each other. A tunnel that
allows cars within 10 seconds of each other could provide more capacity than a
tunnel with higher-density trains spaced further apart. Average density across
the tunnel system could be higher (aka more throughout) with autonomous
vehicles even if individual transport units have lower density (SUVs instead
of train cars).

Off the top of my head, here are issues train cars face with managing density
that autonomous vehicles wouldn't face:

1\. Needing to stop at stations where few people are getting on or off,
meaning that trains behind you must be at least (MAX_SPEED * STOP_TIME) behind
you. With cheap tunnel boring + AVs, you can quickly and cheaply build tunnel
branches that skip exits, so individual cars need less space between them (you
branch off to exit; no need for extra rails or switching technology, since
it's built into the cars).

2\. Entrance/exit from the train car: with trains, any jerk can run in as the
doors are closing, preventing the train from leaving, backing up the trains
behind you and leaving a huge gap with trains in front of you. With AVs,
you're already in the car.

3\. Trains have fairly long stopping distances, increasing the distance needed
between trains for safe operation. Some quick Googling indicated that an 8-car
passenger train traveling at 80mph can take over a mile to come to a complete
stop — it's hard to imagine a car with such long braking distances. That puts
a pretty hard lower bound on how densely you can pack an ordinary subway
tunnel.

Maybe I'm totally wrong, but it would be more useful to give actual data and
evidence than knee-jerk shutdowns. It's not obvious to me, a non-train-
engineer (like many on this site!), that the dismissive tweet is particularly
meaningful.

~~~
Tiktaalik
This is already a solved problem. BART may have huge headways, but Vancouver's
fully automated Skytrain can run at 75 second headways (!!!).

There is no universe where an SUV holding 4 people is more space efficient
than a Skytrain car.

~~~
reissbaker
75 seconds is really, really long. Cars on a highway don't leave 75 seconds in
between each other; if a cutting-edge train does, that starts to imply that
density issues do exist for subway systems.

And how expensive was it to build the train? If you can build 3x the tunnels
for AVs as you can train tunnels and trains for the same price, actual
throughput dollar-for-dollar in infra spend would be much better with Boring
Co tunnels.

Update with data: it cost $2 billion to build 50 miles of Skytrain. Apparently
this prototype Boring Co tunnel cost $10 million per mile. That's a 4x cost
advantage for Boring Co mile-for-mile, and I imagine they'll try to strengthen
that advantage even further; after all, that's their whole company's purpose:
cheap, efficient boring.

~~~
endless1234
>75 seconds is really, really long. Cars on a highway don't leave 75 seconds
in between each other

..and? A car also doesn't carry 500 people.

~~~
steve_musk
But 75 cars spaced 1 second apart...

~~~
dmitriid
Somehow you assume they will be able to get into that tunnel at these
intervals

~~~
Tiktaalik
haha yep.

This plan is like when a city widens a highway but doesn't touch other parts
of the road network? What happens? It just moves the choke point somewhere
else in the network.

~~~
reissbaker
Agreed 1s gaps are too tiny — seems unsafe and that'd be a lot of elevator
traffic. 5s seems doable though: assuming 5s gaps, you need an elevator system
capable of moving one car every 5s, and then the tunnel is optimally
saturated. That doesn't seem insurmountably hard: two elevators that take 10s
each to go from surface to tunnel would be enough, along with a bit of on-ramp
tunnel to allow cars to accelerate to speed before merging. Throw in a third
elevator or a fourth for redundancy while you're at it because elevators are
way cheaper than a mile of tunnel, and seems doable.

~~~
dmitriid
You're assuming you can get cars into the elevators at 5s intervals.

Almost all assumtions in the discussion start directly in the tunnel, and
sometimes at the elevator. Almost no one thinks about: how will cars get into
that thing from the road, how the cars will get out of that thing onto the
road.

~~~
reissbaker
Presumably they'd drive into the elevator on one side, and drive out of the
elevator on the other side.

~~~
dmitriid
Even if you have a separate elevator for entry and a separate eleveotr for
exit: how do you get to a 5s interval?

------
enyone
"Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European
countries."

~~~
imjasonmiller
Google’s AMP seems to circumvent this:

[https://www.google.nl/amp/s/www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m...](https://www.google.nl/amp/s/www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-
me-ln-elon-musk-tunnel-20181218-story.html%3foutputType=amp)

~~~
korijn
So is Google AMP or LA Times then in non-compliance?

~~~
cronix
LA Times didn't want to play the GDPR game so they blocked most of the EU, as
is their prerogative. If Google circumvents that and provides access, that's
on Google imo.

------
cyphunk
I can't see how autonomous cars and Musky holes will be good for common people
and not just turn into another form of exclusive transport for the rich.

~~~
ryanmercer
By taking those 'rich' off the surface streets for a good chunk of their
commute and relieving congestion.

