• trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Because 9/10 times they are awful, expensive, unused, and quickly shut down.

    You don’t see any of these niche techslop pods operating anywhere you actually go, because they don’t work.

    • black0ut@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. I’d say you’re wrong, because it’s 10/10 times these things don’t work. I’ve seen many similar projects get proposed, funded and abandoned (even some that really did sound more efficient than this to me). The truth is, standard trains are still the cheapest thing you can put on those rails. They’re simple, repairable, predictable, they don’t break easily, can be easily driven by anyone or automated with standard systems that have been around for decades. Even if a small govt can’t buy a new train, they can get second hand trains from other cities, which will still work perfectly for decades.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      have you actually looked at what we’re talking about, like at all? or are you just following the programming of “small vehicle=bad”?

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          on the testing tracks, because it’s new technology and needs to be exhaustively tested before the government allows it to be put into service.

          like, trains were also new technology at one point, being new doesn’t somehow inherently make it bad lmao