• Toes♀@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    Their chief priority is profit, isolation and creating a sense of elitism. Public transit is incompatible with all that. So we need buses that are set up like casinos with live bands

      • Basil@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I disagree. My city has a dedicated bus lane that essentially goes from one end to the other, and if more people were using the bus, well, that’s even less traffic.

  • vocornflakes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I read in a book that the current system of drivers acting on their own without something coordinating their every move is actually 75% as efficient as a fully coordinated system.

    Therefore, the benefit obtained with all people using self driving cars is nothing compared to just improving public transit or improving car infrastructure.

    • platypus_plumba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think cars are ever going away, even if public is the main transportation method. Which obviously sucks, but it’s the way it is.

      I’ve always imagined a protocol that lets cars communicate their planned speed. I’m pretty sure this is how cars will work in the future. A decentralized mesh of coordinated vehicles. This means that cars can:

      • Maximize constant speed time, improving energy consumption and traffic flow.
      • Minimize distance between vehicles based on speed and acxeleration while complying with safety standards.
      • Connect to devices such as semaphores in order to tell if the vehicle will pass or not, to make a better decision.
      • Connect to other mesh devices such as AI cameras that feed events to the vehicle mesh.

      Public is obviously the best option though. Imagine a city with no streets, only subterranean public transportation. You wouldn’t even need such a large public transportation system, cities would be a fraction of the current size. I wonder what percentage of the area of a city is wasted on streets.

  • devious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trains are the perfect solution to move people between hubs, but it still doesn’t solve for the last mile problem - which could be solved very effectively with self driving cars (buses, bikes and scooters can work too but based on the usage it can be a mix of all).

    I would love a self driving car that would drop me off at the train station, then take itself back home until I return.

    • shani66@lemmy.comfysnug.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or it could be solved by good city planning. Or hell, even bad city planning, just not this down right malicious shit we have now under car culture.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The last mile problem is much much bigger for cars. Where do u park ur cars? U need large parkings then. Parking spaces need a lot of space. Space that can be used for more housing, more commercial, more parks, etc.

      The best last mile solution in this case is walking and biking. Walking doesn’t require parking. Bicycles do, but they require very very less parking space.

      Also, due to the non motorized nature of these two modes of transport, the public stays healthier, thus drawing less resources from the public health infrastructure.

      I could go on and on, but here’s like 90% of ur answer for the last mile problem.

    • h14h@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      This description of self-driving cars sounds like taxis, but less resource efficient, more error prone, and exclusive to those who can afford to own one.

      Additionally, trams/streetcars have been solving the last mile problem since the 1800s. Sure, you run the risk of needing to walk 5 minutes instead of being driven straight to your destination, but I really don’t see how that justifies paving over millions of acres of land merely to have a convenient place to stick our cars.

      • doingless@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        My nearest bus stop is four miles away with no buses or bike lanes. I live inside the perimeter loop of a major US city.

        • h14h@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That sucks. That’s why I think we should build more bus stops instead of millions of acres of parking lots and forcing everyone to spend thousands of dollars a year to own and operate their own personal heavy machinery.

    • meliaesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’d make more sense for it to give other people rides to/from the station when you’re not using it. Public self driving cars.

        • meliaesc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Absolytely! Options when you are traveling with small children or a lot of luggage are limited, so there’s still opportunities there.

      • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yea, but why not just have a transit station within a 2km radius that you can walk to/ bike to? No need to build expensive roads for cars. U’d get a much more efficient transportation infrastructure which also doesn’t require tech that hasn’t been perfected yet.

    • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. There even used to be a robust public transportation infrastructure here where I live in South Dakota, long ago before everything became so car-centric. Buses and trains. I used to ride the bus to Minnesota to work in the fields. Get off my lawn!

      Don’t believe the people who say we can’t sustain it. That’s their carbrain talking. It’s been done before. We just need to prioritize it.

      • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well no. I live rural. So rural we don’t have pedestrian walkways or anything.

        I’m not anti public transportation. I’m pro pro pro. However trains don’t help rural. Rural get shafted on most things. No broadband no sewage no bin pick up. You have to drive.

        I fucking hate driving. I would happily sit on any number of vehicles. It’s just not feasible unfortunately.

        The country I currently reside in has no trains. Relies on planes which is beyond infuriating

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have family who live in rural Norway, and yeah – they drive to the train station. Still a big improvement over having to drive all the way to work or the store.

          And yeah-- I’m talking about small tiny towns having buses and trains. Look at a map of South Dakota. That’s the state where I live, and we had them.

          • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Only works if the costs is less. No point driving to station to pay triple what driving would get you and take longer

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The point is that you are part of a larger community, and it’s appropriate to behave as such. People ride public transport every day, and you can too. You’re not better than anyone else, and if you have rural acreage, you can certainly afford the time and money to support the type of infrastructure that benefits the majority as well as our planet.

              • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Fuck are you on about?

                There’s no public transportation here. I’d need to drive an hour to the nearest city. In which case I no longer require the public transportation.

                Why would I be better than anyone? I’m worse off not better.

                I have more money and time because I live rural.

                What are you even trying to say ?

                • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  There’s no public transportation here.

                  Congratulations, you’ve identified the problem! Therefore, we need infrastructure, which is what I’ve been saying all along!

                  Why would I be better than anyone? I’m worse off not better.

                  You would literally be on the same transportation as everyone else. Poor you.

                  I have more money and time because I live rural.

                  Unless you are a farmer or similar, it is far more sustainable to live in a town. Living in an expansive rural acreage or in a suburb is a luxury that we shouldn’t cater to.

                  What are you even trying to say ?

                  I’m saying public transportation in rural areas is feasible, and something that is sustained in many parts of the world. There’s nothing about your situation that makes it so it wouldn’t work for you. You’ve just been heavily propagandized by capitalists who profit from our current broken system.

        • shani66@lemmy.comfysnug.space
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Honestly, the government should reclaim the land you live on, for good money and after building better population centers of course. Not that people couldn’t move back after some amount of time had passed, but i doubt most would if they felt what it was like to live in an actual civilized society for once and being that rural should be a major outlier.

          I live rural too, so I’d know how poorly that’d go over with the hicks, but i do genuinely think a restructure of society like that is necessary.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Show me a map from any year that serviced rural south Dakota, picking up rural passengers at their property lines

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          picking up rural passengers at their property lines

          Lol what? Unless you are disabled, you don’t need someone to pick you up at your property line. That’s carbrain entitlement. Walk to the train station/bus depot, cycle, or drive a modest car that short distance (the latter being exactly what some of my family do, who live in a more developed nation).

          I do agree we also need to expand infrastructure to accommodate disabled people, though. That’s a separate issue.

          The point is, we can have a train and bus system here. It’s been done in the past. Personally, I’d welcome it. Owning a car is such a pointless and unsustainable money sink.

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Mojojo has a chronic case of carbrain. They’re part of the problem.

              Don’t be Mojojo.

              Edit: Mojojo’s comment doesn’t even address any of what I said to you. Yo, what???

              • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                "Does train come pick me up and drop me off again ?

                Gotta love dem rural trains. "

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      We must stop all progress until we can come up with a solution that includes less than 20% of the population.

      • doingless@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My problem with most transportation policy is that it usually involves tax penalties. A lot of people can’t afford to move to the city. Making cars more expensive as an incentive just creates human suffering in rural areas.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sweden has hourly trains that go through 1-2k population mountain villages that connect to all the major cities.

      100% possible if the political will is there.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      rural trains are amazing, on the branch line near me there are stations in the middle of nowhere with like maybe 50 people tops within bike distance of the station, it’s absolutely idyllic.

      imagine living like that and being able to just step into a moving building that takes you to a big city full of amenities, it’s so good.

      • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep, when people start talking about how rural trains make no sense or are impossible, I immediately think of where my relatives live in Norway. It’s so nice, and I’m jealous.

          • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            We’ve actually regressed in my little US state (South Dakota). My grandma used to talk about taking the train to some little towns. We also used to have more buses and taxis when I was a kid. My parents used to put us on a bus in the summer so we could work in the fields (which I know doesn’t sound like stellar parenting, and I’m not recommending it, but it really was a different time).

          • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            it’s not “yet”, it’s “anymore”.

            most of the west used to have rural trains basically everywhere, even northern sweden was full of lines. Then around the 60’s we all got rid of them.

    • TheKrevFox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      As far as transit goes, the TTC should NOT be the model to follow. It’s better than nothing, but there’s better.

    • Canuck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      OP probably doesn’t know you need to wait 1h in line just to board it out of Union evening rush hour. And that’s assuming it doesn’t get stuck in snow, traffic, crash, etc. Toronto needs subways, and better optimized roads, not more streetcars.

  • Spendrill@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    There was a young man who said, “Damn!
    It is borne upon me that I am
    An engine that moves
    In predestinate grooves;
    I’m not even a bus, I’m a tram.”

  • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Who are these “some people”. I don’t think it’s a majority. In fact most comments I see say the opposite.

    • Sombyr@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Corporate propaganda is the “some people.” Electric/self-driving cars are more profitable than fixing or expanding public transit.

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lemmy faces selection bias, of course most people here are more partial towards public transit

      But the general public is more mixed, and the technosphere of silicon valley etc very much favours the former.

  • essell@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It already takes me an hour to get to work from my rural home. You wanna make it two?

      • essell@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Would that mean faster buses through the village?

        Maybe spend a few billion on a high-speed rail though the countryside to my little place?

        What harm could that do?

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No need for HSR if ur place doesn’t need the capacity provided by HSR. But yes, buses are definitely the best option in this case. Better infrastructure for buses would mean this:

          • More frequent buses
          • Higher quality buses and bus stops
          • Faster travel: Due to a combination of three factors:
            1. More frequent buses, better buses and bus stops would mean that more people take buses. This means more efficient use of space on roads. Which means less traffic. Which means faster buses.
            2. Better bus infrastructure could include changes to roads themselves, like bus lanes, separate roadways with right of way to buses and so on. This would make sure that buses intermingle with road traffic as less as possible. These solutions are most suitable to inner cities rather than highways connecting cities and towns of course. Regardless, this makes buses faster. This is often referred to as “BRTs”, i.e., “Bus Rapid Transit”. Functionally, this is the closest you get to a metro without building a metro.
            3. Better bus infrastructure would mean changes to stuff like traffic signalling, buses themselves and so on. Changes like traffic signals turning green when a bus approaches a crossing would mean that buses never have to stop at red lights, thus saving a lot of time. Also, changes to buses could include stuff like bike stands at the front and back, which can increase the effective range of buses BY A LOT.

          Sooo yeah… Building and maintaining bus infrastructure is tremendously cheap in the grand scheme of things, especially when compared to private cars and the infrastructure required to sustain private cars.

          Also, buses come in different sizes, meaning that no matter how small your town is, there can always be frequent bus service that is also efficient at the same time.

  • 100_kg_90_de_belin@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The previous Italian government appointed Cingolani, someone with strong ties to ENI (an infamous Italian multinational energy company with a history of oil leaks and bribes) to the the so-called “ecological transition”.

    The current Italian government has cut the subsidies for public transportation and has announced public funding for a renewal of privately-owned cars.

    There is no way out of this. The last CEO will die whispering, “profits are up, though.”

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Me a guy in infrastructure: hahahahaha… oh wait you were serious. Let me laugh even harder now.

    Engineering is to a great extent accepting the givens. Cost disease grows more rampant by the year without showing any signs of letting up. There are ways to fix that but we aren’t going to do them. The reason why people are considering solutions like this is because better solutions aren’t possible any more.

  • gnygnygny@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Subway or aerotrains are great tram just added more mess into the traffic and are dangerous for pedestrians.