• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
    911·
    15 天前

    Okay, but if you look carefully at the top of the inverted pyramid, you’ll notice that there are no homeless people allowed to participate.

    Also, the bottom has no less than six trees which is Woke.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.caEnglish
      15·
      15 天前

      The whole thing stinks of socialism.

      Like we should, idk, pool our resources to “improve” our lives or something…

      Nah, I’d rather burn prehistoric forests in my trukk because I’m so free.

      America, fuck yeah

    • callcc@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      14 天前

      That pisses me of too. Especially since cars are even worse than the infographic makes it look like.

  • ArmchairAce1944@discuss.onlineEnglish
    14·
    13 天前

    Some say that cars represent freedom and the ability to go where you want when you want.

    But tech oligarchs want to destroy that, too. Basically by having their cars require a connection and monitor your every movement within the car and where you are going and when. They also are obsessed with self-driving cars because they then would have more control over your movements.

    In short there will BE no plus side to having a car in the very near future. They are enshittifying everything.

    • Timecircleline@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      3·
      13 天前

      If it wasn’t so dystopian, I’d be for it. Self driving cars that you can book as needed would require less space be devoted to parking and one vehicle could serve as transportation for more people. Combined with easy and accessible public transit and thoughtful pedestrian and cyclist-friendly city design, being less reliant on vehicles sounds like a dream. If you could book the equivalent of an Uber and have it be available within 5 minutes for a reasonable price, why wouldn’t you? In such a scenario, cars would only be for hobbyists. Those who aren’t able to drive (elderly, people with disabilities) would have more equitable access to, well, anything that requires you to physically be somewhere.

      Truthfully though, I don’t see a place where capatilism would allow this to happen. Selling everyone their own vehicle, with their own maintenance fees (and now subscription fees), accessories, fuel, etc… is way too lucrative.

  • Furbag@lemmy.worldEnglish
    14·
    14 天前

    Helsinki just had 0 traffic deaths this past year because they focused all their funding on improving public transportation and bike lanes, disincentivizing car use, and punishing motorists who use their phone or speed by setting up cameras.

    I sure wish somebody would look at that incredible success story and try to emulate it here. Unfortunately, public transit seems to be getting less reliable over time instead, which just encourages more car use.

    • bluemite@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      13 天前

      Whenever someone brings up a European city like this, they seem to ignore the fact that the entire country of Finland is roughly the size of the state of Montana. It’s like comparing apples and oranges.

      • Furbag@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        13 天前

        Okay? We can still compare Helsinki to a similar sized American city. I don’t see how that’s unfair.

    • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
      1·
      10 天前

      We just got seatbelt/phone use cameras in Canberra, Australia. We’ve had stopped cameras for more than 20 years, most now average your speed over several kilometres (on one highway for a couple of hundred kilometres) and disincentive speeding effectively

    • f314@lemmy.worldEnglish
      27·
      15 天前

      I’m guessing they include all the necessary infrastructure, not just the tracks themselves. And it does say “in each direction”, so we’re talking two tracks.

      • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nzEnglish
        3·
        15 天前

        Honestly you’re in the 11-15m range in most cases, because you want lineside equipment (signal cabinets, masts, cable routing etc) and ideally a 4WD path for maintenance access.

        9m is doable but you don’t built an entire system like that unless you really have to. Equally, your roads have hard shoulders and crash barriers.

    • zaphod@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      8·
      15 天前

      Standard guage rails are 1.435m wide, plus surrounding space because trains are wider than rails plus a second track.

  • OldChicoAle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    15 天前

    I was gonna say people need to sacrifice for the greater common good but then I realized what community this was and knew people were on my same wavelength.

      • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        31·
        14 天前

        Not sure about English terminology but I thought tram and metro are the same and it’s small trains that go on the street or maybe have a separate lane?

        • zaphod@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          4·
          14 天前

          Tram (also known as streetcar or trolley) usually goes on rails in a street that is shared with cars. A metro (also known as subway or underground) usually has it’s own separated tracks that are often underground or elevated.

        • myotheraccount@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          14 天前

          Metros are also called subways or undergrounds.

          There are some cities where trams function like metros (have dedicated tunnels for part of the route), but usually the two are separate systems, with different types of rolling stock.

          Metros usually go faster than trams, because they don’t interact with other traffic, and have less frequent stops.

          • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            2·
            14 天前

            interesting. i think in our city, trams and metro are not clearly separated. parts of the trams’ tracks run on their own lane, while other parts mix with the other traffic.

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zipEnglish
    71·
    15 天前

    Metros are good for extremely heavy lines and lrt/tram/whatever other similar form of transit is good for convenience and accessibility(that even well built cities often ignore…) but the king is still bikes in my opinion. I live in a city of 150k so its quite a bit smaller than most places where youd have more mass oriented transit but its still interesting to see that the fastest path to city center is with bike. Not bus, not train(except if you live right next to it) and not car.

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      161·
      15 天前

      A subway is a metro line located underground. Throughput is the same. Its just more expensive to dig the tunnels

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        111·
        15 天前

        this is why you contract out the tunnel construction to past you, when labor was cheaper. worked in london, nyc, paris… hell of a trick

      • sping@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        2·
        15 天前

        A subway is the American word for metro surely? And London’s is generally called The Underground.

        • Infrapink@thebrainbin.org
          1·
          15 天前

          The first metro to be called a subway is in Glasgow. They tried to rename it the Glasgow Underground to match London, but reverted to the old name when nobody used the new name.

      • udon@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21·
        15 天前

        In practice, throughput is not the same. There are fewer cars underground that just park on the tracks, fewer traffic accidents, demos etc. Subways make you independent of almost everything that happens above ground. When Beijing introduced the subway system, that first allowed people to estimate quite precisely when they would arrive at their destination.

        Also, fewer people plan to build a park underground or use that real estate otherwise. So the above-ground use of space is restricted to the station entrances. The calculation would even be different in places like Seoul, where the subway system doubles as a public bunker system.

        • MrMakabar@slrpnk.netEnglish
          5·
          15 天前

          You seem to think of a tram. A metro is grade separated. So nothing, but the trains should be on the tracks at all times.

          So this for example is a metro, but not a subway: