this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
1094 points (98.7% liked)

memes

10184 readers
2011 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

I know it's just a meme but they both solve different enough problems. A self-driving car can easily turn back into a non-self driving car, meaning you can self drive for long transit and switch to a normal one in the city or hectic areas. This basically solves the issue of self drive tech not being smart/reliable enough. Which, as you probably also agree, is still quite far from perfect.

[–] Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world 59 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

Take any tech bro take on transit, and if you try to perfect it, you'll almost always end up with a train.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago

Issue is, tech bros want "individual pods", with some futuristic look.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 2 points 43 minutes ago (2 children)

The problem is "perfection" looks different to different people.

If you're optimizing for efficiency, then you're absolutely correct.
If you're optimizing for convenience then shit like personal taxi drones is probably gonna be better.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 29 minutes ago (2 children)

And yet a coordinated approach with multiple strategies will most effectively cover every use case.

  • conservatives get too attached to personal vehicles as the strategy they are most familiar with, most focussed on
  • too many transit advocates recognize the limitations of personal vehicles and the advantages of rail, but tend to speak in absolutes that scare conservatives.

Yes it’s critical that we refocus much of our transportation effort to give more people better choices in more scenarios, but that will never rule out cars

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 minutes ago

The point I was trying to make was that tech bros are almost certainly trying to optimize for convenience, because they live in a bubble where thats what's important to them (or that's what has the highest margins).

[–] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 1 points 19 minutes ago

Trains are extremely convenient. You optimize them for convenience by adding more trains.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

What about the moon? Surely not...

Well, ultimately space elevators are the most energy efficient way to escape Earth's gravity well. And once we have one of those, mind as well build a mass driver at the top so rockets don't have to carry so much of their own mass. Then we can build a laser-based photonic sail on the other end to decelerate the cars and make them even lighter/faster, and then build track at the bottom...

Train.

What about interstellar travel?

Well, ultimately wormholes are way more efficient than any subluminal travel once the infrastructure to build them is in place: https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/48545a0f6352a

So we control traffic on each side carefully. In fact, we could just suspend a really strong wire on either end...

Yep. Train.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 46 minutes ago

I mean, currently both space elevators and wormholes (as transportation) seem physically impossible.

If we're not sticking to the realm of our current understanding of physics, then that opens the doors for techbros too, because we're in the realm of speculative fiction and things can be however we say they are.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 9 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

What about those giant quadcopter type things they keep wanting to build to fly from building rooftops in cities for some reason?

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago

Everyone thinks the sky is big, without considering just how unscalable flying cars are

  • no building is designed for large scale entry/exit at roof top. Most don’t support any
  • the low altitude airspace over a densely populated area is very limited. Given current separation, minimum altitude, speed limitations, a city can support only a small number of flying cars. And no, “smart” vehicles don’t change the laws of physics, even if they help us get closer to them
  • a flying car will always be more expensive than a not flying car, which will always be more expensive than transit

Let’s stop worrying about new ways for the ultra-rich to avoid the frustrations the rest of us have to deal with, we’ll all be better off if they also have an incentive to design more effective cities and transportation for everyone

[–] Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world 8 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Within cities?

Look, aircraft are Hella noisy and if stuff goes bad, they'll smash into buildings. Using them for intra-urban transit is not safe. Besides, I don't know if multicopters can autorotate, which only adds to the safety concerns.

So why not bring it slightly closer to the ground. Maybe put the transportation device on a bridge or viaduct. And while you could put some stairs up from the streets, you may even choose to link buildings into them directly. Most tall buildings have lifts, after all.

Next, giving each building its own link into the system would be excessive. You can achieve 90 percent of the utility if you have larger entry hubs for multiple buildings, and expect people to walk the last mile.

Anyway, back to the vehicle, since a vehicle for a handful of people is rather inefficient, why not build the vehicles for many dozens of people? Why not build it to connect multiple vehicles? If you run, like, four of these, every five minutes, most people will be able to walk up any time and just go.

And to make that movement more efficient, let's have our vehicles roll along a specifically designed path, optimised for minimal friction by using hard wheels on a hard surface.

There, I replaced the quadcopters with a train.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 7 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

If they really want rooftop travel, a gondola system could probably work.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 28 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

I want to be done with car shaped cars... I want a self driving room to show up...I want to say "send me a living room/bedroom/office/whatever," and have a room shaped vehicle show up to get me. I want that vehicle to drive me to the nearest train tracks and hop on the tracks itself and then zoom me to the nearest hyper loop and jump itself on that to zip me across the country in an hour... Join up with other "rooms" as you go to create a typical looking train

[–] VantaBrandon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Ah hyperloop, the fictional transportation method meant to scam California voters

[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

It would require a Manhattan Project sized effort, but I think it could be done

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 18 points 19 hours ago

Having slept in a train bed that has a bathroom and was 3 doors down from a kitchen, it's wild that we looked at a car and went, "That's what I want."

[–] el_bhm@lemm.ee 5 points 17 hours ago

Jetsons theme starts playing

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

go live in a tiny house first to get a feel. you can even get one on wheels and have it towed around for the full experience. be kinda pricy though

[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I mean...I don't want to live in it, I just want it to be able to handle both roads and rails and zip me around

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 points 50 minutes ago

you can do roads or rails not both

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 99 points 1 day ago (5 children)

How many times will techbros reinvent the train/tram until North America finally starts laying down rails?

[–] spicytuna62@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Don't even need to lay down rails. The rails are already there. Built by Chinese slave labor 150 years ago. We need merely to seize them.

Or just cut a check to the freight companies.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 30 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Many cities paved over their tram lines. Sometimes they poke through during road work. We had trams in nearly every city 100 years ago yet today people tell me we can't afford it or our population is too small to support it. If we could do it 100 years ago we could certainly do it now.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 10 points 22 hours ago

Even the rural college town my grandma grew up in had tram lines running down the main streets in the 30's and to both colleges. If a city had more than 20,000 residents 100 years ago, they probably had a tram system that was pulled up at GM's behest.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] iturnedintoanewt@lemm.ee 20 points 23 hours ago

I love this Adam Something classic where they keep optimizing the tech bro idea until it turns into Thomas the Engine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eHWVjUAukU

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

The US has so much tarmac they don’t even need rails just turn some of that tarmac into dedicated bus lanes. And put one of these long boys on them

longest articulated bus

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Just lay rails in the lane. Turn it into, I dunno, a fuck you I'm a train lane

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago

Bus lanes are too easy for the next politician to remove bus priority and allow cars back into the lane. At least with rails it's a lot more costly to remove the route. Busses also still contribute to microplastics and tire waste compared to railed trams. Trams are also easier to automate which can make employing drivers and adding trams to lines less difficult compared to buses. The rails are also more effecient as there is less friction.

I'd defintely take BRT over no transit but many cities are dense enough to justify electrified trams.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 8 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

On account of the election, you can basically be sure that passenger rail will not happen to any extent any time soon. Expect bigger cars and more highways instead, as this is what is outlined in Project 2025.

Incredibly bleak.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 19 hours ago

We don't even need big trail routes. Just put in a small trolley that stops throughout a city. It doesn't need to go everywhere but it could do business areas and tourist destinations

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 12 points 20 hours ago

I think what they want is trains with individual private cars that can automatically choose the tracks you want by selecting a destination. Which would be fucking awesome it's how I thought cars worked when I was 4, I swear all the steering wheel did was change lanes (my folks were good drivers I guess).

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

next up in the agenda: what if we make cars larger so more people can travel in them simultaneously

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

I just keep thinking about the automated robots that have existed since I was a child that just followed a painted line on the ground. Those operate around people, other robots and vehicles in ways similar to traffic on a public road, and yet they have none of the issues autonomous cars have. They're far, far more simple.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 7 points 16 hours ago

If a line-following robot bumps into a 3 year old, it might knock them over. It's a different situation with high speed 2 ton death machines

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Can't we just do like, lines on the road that have specific meanings? We could put it all in a book of rules and standards? Make it a nation wide system?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Let's bring back trams and trollies

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 4 points 19 hours ago

There's trolleys in my city. I love them riding on their little tracks and I go choo choo.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

It's not a hard problem to solve. It's not hard to see the reasoning behind a desire for self driving cars. Anyone who lives outside of a big city in the US knows this.

Roads are already present. Traffic control is already present.

Tie the goddamn roads to the goddamn traffic control and have it coordinate the cars. The cars input their destination, and have radar to stop the car to prevent accidental collision.

The problem is people don't like that they can't get to their destination faster, they don't have the freedom of choosing their exact route, and they can't just rev their engine whenever they want.

It's not mass transit, but it solves the final distance problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›