3 ms·

I thought there might have been fewer trees in the earliest video, but it was really difficult to tell with the film quality and the speed of things rushing by.

I thought there might have been fewer trees in the earliest video, but it was really difficult to tell with the film quality and the speed of things rushing by. If the rail was newly laid in the 50s, then they might have had to cut down the trees, and they take a while to come back. The difference that jumped out at me the most is the decline in hats. I wonder how many haberdashers were put out of work during this period. > it's interesting to reminded that big, capital intestive stuff like bridges and tunnels and roads are still built with 50+ year expected lifetimes. I can't imagine writing software with anything like that staying power. I've given thought to this. Engineers are expected to get things like that right the first time, and the structures have to last a long time. But the engineers don't have to invent a new kind of bridge or road every time they design one. Software, being cheap to make lots of copies of, has to do something completely new every time you write it.

vidarh 13y ago
> If the rail was newly laid in the 50s, then they might have had to cut down the trees It wasn't. The first London to Brighton railway line opened in 1841. Most of sections of the two main paths from Brighton to London (to London Victoria and London Bridge respectively) should have been complete by about 1855. There was expansion work (adding extra tracks) on the busiest section of the line around 1908, but I think that was the last major work on the London-Brighton lines apart from connecting branches. There's of course been replacements and upgrades, but these tends to happen bit by bit.
- mtdewcmu 13y ago
  It was after the war, and the US was doing enormous infrastructure projects, so it seemed plausible that they did something around that time. Plus, they made a film to show it. But it was really hard to see the trees in the film, so it could be an illusion.

vidarh 13y ago

> If the rail was newly laid in the 50s, then they might have had to cut down the trees It wasn't. The first London to Brighton railway line opened in 1841. Most of sections of the two main paths from Brighton to London (to London Victoria and London Bridge respectively) should have been complete by about 1855. There was expansion work (adding extra tracks) on the busiest section of the line around 1908, but I think that was the last major work on the London-Brighton lines apart from connecting branches. There's of course been replacements and upgrades, but these tends to happen bit by bit.

mtdewcmu 13y ago
It was after the war, and the US was doing enormous infrastructure projects, so it seemed plausible that they did something around that time. Plus, they made a film to show it. But it was really hard to see the trees in the film, so it could be an illusion.