[–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

Suburban sprawl car infrastructure bus is not really compatible with public transportation. Until we start building more dense housing and planning public transportation utilities etc. with all of that in mind it’s not going to change.

You also have the additional issue of existing infrastructure and converting that over to something that would work with any type of public transportation. And we all know none of that shits gonna change. If you want a good example of that look at all the small towns that are connected to Boston via the T, and how the residents and the small towns refused to allow the building of dense housing and are battling it out with the transportation Authority who refuses to upgrade their service or to keep their service going to the town unless there is more dense housing.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Yeah well buses are for poor people. So nobody gives a shit about buses or their infrastructure.

    If we really wanted buses to be a dominant public transportation system then there would be smaller local buses going on regular loops from housing complexes to stores or to other forms of infrastructure. We would design our housing to be even in a suburban area serviced by buses and shopping centers and whatever else you needed but instead of forcing everyone to buy a car and telling them it’s convenient.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (3 children)

    Yeah buses are the last remaining vestigial public transportation system outside of those major cities. There’s also a few cities that have a light rail system that is functional, provided you live close enough to a light rail stop and your destination is also near enough of light rail stop.

    When I was in Denver, I decided to do a thought experiment and see if I could take the bus from where I lived to where I worked. A 20 minute drive with zero traffic is a one hour plus commute with traffic.

    If I were to take the bus it would be 80+ stops, four bus transfers, and 2x 25 minute walks through private property and peoples backyards on either side of that bus trip. If I missed one single bus transfer the next bus didn’t come for at least another hour.

    Needless to say, using the bus is not a viable way to reliably get to work. So while you can argue that there are buses, and that they do run, it’s not really a realistic public transportation system unless you have no other choice.

    Let’s say I want to go to the grocery store. I would need to walk 20 - 25 minutes just to get to the bus stop, Wait 15 minutes to an hour for the bus to arrive, ride a bunch of stops Impossibly transferred to another bus, and finally walk from the bus stop to wherever the store is which could be another 20 - 25 minute walk in places where there are not sidewalks or on the edge of a 4-6 lane Strode. And after I’ve done my shopping I now have to carry all my stuff on the same return trip.

    So just to get to the store I’m gonna walk 40 to 50 minutes, ride the bus for an hour, walk through infrastructure not designed for pedestrians, and then carry all my stuff back the same way. Total trip time is anywhere between two and four hours just to go to the store do some shopping and come back.

    That’s not really functional public transportation. If you’re an elderly person and you’re 55/60 or older, taking the bus is not really a viable option. fuck you might get a heat stroke while waiting for the goddamn bus.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

    You are correct except you have ignored by far and away the most common form of mass transit in the US which are bus systems.

    Bus systems are the only hope for the US as it stands for mass transit in the medium term, we must treat them as the focus of transit systems not a detail or sidething to compliment other forms of transit.

    For example where I live in the US has a totally free bus system.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    Can't trust anyone ever. TV used to be "Free" but you had to endure some ads. I found a VHS recording of Kqrate Kid a few years ago and it had really short ads. They started to cram more and more ads in. What if we play shows at 1.3 times the speed and cut some shit out? One more ad. I think at that point i'm just too autistic to watch ads. My sister always says that she doesn't mind, she just records everything and skips the ads. Now, with some blockbusters, apparently you can't do that anymore, so she's just back to ads. I don't think i have seen a TV ad in 15 years at my place. Now you pay for streaming AND watch ads. It's insanity to me. I just couldn't, i'd rather not watch something anymore tbh.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    They're probably expecting Bolsonaro to revert the ban when he gets elected (I'm hoping it doesn't come to that but things are not looking good)

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Also, while it was never good for customers, it also hasn't enshittified on the production side yet.

    In a couple of years^1^, when their library looks like an Amazon search result, with AI-generated films by studios with household names like UBOOPI or SUWEEMA at the top of every category, then the platform is fully enshittified.


    ^1^: barring the more likely scenario of the AI bubble already having popped.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Depends on what country you're in. In America you could face legal consequences for torrenting without a VPN. Which does cost some money but it's still far cheaper than paying for streaming services. Unless you're taking HDD prices into account... I haven't done the math again since those things quadrupled in price.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›