Sigh - this video is an embarrassment to Thunderf00t's typical level of intellectual quality and I lost a great deal of respect for him because of it. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and blame this abortion on him being a scientist and not an engineer, but I can't help but think it's just half-assed click bait and he's sold out his integrity for views.
So first the whole tube thing - I guess he didn't know we have thousands of miles of natural gas pipelines that operate from 200psi to 1500psi and have a lot of the same design concerns. Obviously the Hyperloop will take a bit of tweaking from what we're doing now, but the ground work is already there and well within our capabilities.
Next are the fears of capsule depressurization - this can be easily worked around with a number of fail safes like self-sealing bulkheads, emergency tube repressurization, etc. It would take a massive rupture of the capsule to depressurize quickly enough to be a concern, and even then it'd be vastly easier to deal with than a loss of cabin pressure at 35,000ft. He also complains about the dangers of an extremely rapid and violent repressurization of the tube, which would take an act of terrorism and a good amount of ordinance to actually happen - this could be resolved by creating a system to rapidly and evenly repressurize the tube in the event of an emergency (look at the text he quotes in the video, it explains just how this would work, yet he totally ignores it and pretends like it's not there). I will admit there are some safety concerns, but the actual risks are much less than driving a car, and probably less than air travel. The extremely risk averse can stay at home I suppose, but I'd feel a lot safer on a Hyperloop than an interstate.
Then we get to the grand daddy of them all and it becomes abundantly clear he didn't even read the Wikipedia article, much less the actual white paper - he claims it's propelled by a turbine and explains everything wrong with that idea. Obviously propelling something in a near vacuum with a turbine is fucking stupid - that's why the proposal is to use linear magnetic propulsion like a maglev. There is a compressor system that reduces the air pressure at the front of the capsule and uses it to produce an air bearing between the capsule and the tube like an air hockey table (although magnetic levitation may be used instead). This is to prevent the capsule from compressing the air in front of it as it moves at high speed and has nothing to do with propulsion. This setup will result in extremely high efficiencies as friction is minimized and very little kinetic energy is lost to heat. If the magnetic propulsion system also employs regenitive breaking, a majority of the energy used to initially accelerate the capsule can be captured at the end. I lost a lot of respect for Thunderf00t over this glaring error in his analysis, and while I hope he just misread, I can't help but wonder if he was intentionally trying to mislead his audience.
Anyway, I only spent a couple minutes coming up with solutions to these 'issues', I'm sure with some more thought much more elegant solutions can be devised. Yes, taking Hyperloop from a concept to a safe and functional product will take some R&D, but it very reasonably could transport people and cargo faster than sound while consuming only a handful of joules per passenger.
Before he posted this video I was a regular viewer and greatly enjoyed his scientific analysis and regular debunking of physically impossible products. This video only touches on engineering problems, not actual science problems, and engineers have solved much greater challenges in the past. I hope we as a society don't fall into this trap of not trying something worthwhile because it's hard.