3 ms·
Our modern transit system has no correlation to the complexity of transit service previously. Enjoy fewer schedules, more delays, and higher costs; pick three.
by gjsman-1000 1y ago
Our modern transit system has no correlation to the complexity of transit service previously. Enjoy fewer schedules, more delays, and higher costs; pick three.
Edit, for the pedantic: There's a huge difference between horizontal complexity (i.e. variety of transit options) and vertical complexity (complexity of a particular option). We have less horizontal complexity than we used to; but vertical complexity of a modern railroad is obscene compared to historical standards.
> But if it did, I assume "local-first" entails other traffic just being excluded when an emergency in the local system necessitates it.
No dice; as consider just 14 hours ago:
https://x.com/SFBARTalert/status/1963772853947355630?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet https://x.com/SFBARTalert/status/1963772853947355630?ref_src...
How does a local-first train safely operate if it could go through a police zone? You need communication, by definition, not local-first.
- MangoToupe 1y agoThere's a fourth factor here: labor costs.
- op00to 1y agoI don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Is it that we have more or less complexity? The public transit system was far more complex in the past. Between trolleys, inter urbans, and passenger trains, we’ve lost a LOT of routes.
- privatelypublic 1y agoTheres things police could/can attach to the rail to signal trains to stop. I think our over reliance on the telecom network has lead to safety issues- mostly in terms of "what to do when the telecom goes down." Because on the whole, its astoundingly reliable.