this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2026
550 points (97.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

16250 readers
62 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Those same computer repairs can be done remotely. Or you have a mechanic on board for repairs, just not driving the train.

Besides, trains already have a dozen crew anyways, serving drinks, checking tickets, etc. No need to risk lives when we don't need to.

[–] unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Those same computer repairs can be done remotely.

A number of them can't be done remotely - especially if it's not just simply a computer repair.

Or you have a mechanic on board for repairs, just not driving the train.

Essentially, the driver often serves as half a mechanic. So, at that point, he might as well drive the train (or at least survey the system, making it either GoA 2 or 3 ).

Besides, trains already have a dozen crew anyways

Except they don't. The number of crew is constantly being reduced - in fact, self driving trains themselves are a crew reduction method. In fact, most self driving trains don't have any crew along in the first place.

No need to risk lives when we don't need to.

Except it's far from clear that we're risking lives, see above.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's also babies around, they might as well also drive the train for a while. Both them and drivers have higher accident rates that automated systems, after all.

[–] unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're ignoring:

Problem is, what is the tradeoff. So you switch to driverless trains. First of all, it has only worked in completely isolated systems until now (no mainline railways). Then, you have the problem that when something goes wrong, the consequences in terms of delays are much larger, often making the news, because there's no one there that can just "quickly do something" to get around the problem and keep going. People tend to get stuck in trains for long times when issues arise - see the REM in Montreal. What's the consequence of unreliable public transit? People tend to avoid it more, often switching back to their cars for important trips - a much more dangerous form of transportation.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 22 hours ago

I'm not ignoring it, I already said that you can have a mechanic or another crew member taking care of it.