• quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    ·
    10 months ago

    No, China doesn’t count because that would challenge my worldview. I know I’m right, I just haven’t figured out how yet.

    • nohaybanda [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      Truths are complicated and challenging. We don’t have to take sides or teams; although I know it’s difficult given then times we live in, where we feel the pressure to take sides given how fast we are bombarded with information. Join me and others in the effort to be comfortable with cognitive dissonance…

      (context)

  • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I hate the attitude that professor exhibits. “Well we might’ve wasted years of work, billions of dollars, millions of man-hours, burned up large stockpiles of limited resources, arrested development of national infrastructure doing something we knew was impossible and in this process we’ve created absolutely nothing worthwhile, but at least I learned a lot! Gotta look on the bright side!”

  • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I know this is the second time this shit has been posted, but most rail-less nations are not building railroads because they do not have the nessecery capital intensive industry to build railroads, let alone build a poor man’s railroad and then redevelop it, because the world is being purposefully choked of development funds by the IMF and World Bank. God forbid demand gets fulfilled.

    • IzyaKatzmann [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      that’s fair, prior to the current in-progress de-industrialization of germany, do you think they had the capacity or could have reasonably built up the capacity for high-speed rail?

      • reverendz [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        10 months ago

        I went to Germany in '96, and was amazed how on time the trains were. If the schedule said “7:52 arrival” then set your watch by it.

        Now? Not so much.

        https://www.dw.com/en/germany-rail-operator-deutsche-bahn-admits-major-drop-in-punctuality/a-60338352

        https://www.iamexpat.de/expat-info/german-expat-news/2023-deutsche-bahn-delays-already-worse-expected


        At this point, it’s startlingly clear that de-industrialization is wide scale corporate raiding.

        Can anyone point to a country that de-industrialized and maintained infrastructure?

      • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The entirety of Europe had the industrial capacity and know-how to transition towards both High Speed Rail and entire light rail system in the 80’s and 90’s, even after the chaos of the collapse of the USSR. It’s honestly shocking that they didn’t given the seriousness that the 80’s oil crisis caused, but I have to assume at this point they were banking on the balkanization of Russia and were basically doing a test run in the former Yugoslavia.

        The problem is that the whole of elite European liberal intellectualism is completely wound up in essentially emulating what they perceive to be “American freedom”, you’ll still run into this with exchange students all the time. The problem is that ‘American freedom’ will ultimately completely destroy your infrastructural integrity and thus degrade your industrial capacity.

        • IzyaKatzmann [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Ok thanks for sharing that makes things make a bit more sense. So like auto is a big industry in like Germany, maybe Italy? and Amerika, Klanada. For like the UK though, was it the bourgeois had financial interests in auto succeeding and then also oil doing well? It just seems weird that some people in the UK now drive pickup trucks when they don’t even have the carbrained infrastructure that a place like Amerika has.

          • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            What you are seeing is the value of social ideology rationally taking precedence over material considerations. It doesn’t matter what makes the most sense in terms of actual efficiency, it is about what makes sense to appeal to your elite social peers, who don’t have to make decisions based on material considerations.

            • IzyaKatzmann [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Ok, that makes sense. Do you think it’s possible to have an idea of what sort of arbitrary criterion would affect elite social peers for a given phenomena? Like to know specifically on a case-by-case basis. I don’t think it’d be particularly useful, just curious.

              • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                I think the ‘objective’ methodology for figuring that out would be either a marketing study, ethnography or something else. My rule of thumb is to see where the majority of advertising money is going. The rich and elite are usually more susceptible to advertising schemes because they have the ability to replicate the lives that marketing portrays. That is the beauty of owning massive amounts of private capital, while it is selling an unattainable material lie to us proles, it is only selling an unattainable spiritual lie (that if you are unhappy despite money and success, consumption will solve that unhappiness) to the wealthy and elite. They can actually attain the material reality portrayed in advertising, so it is just a matter of getting their eyeballs on it.

                Also, within capitalism, isolation is usually the rule of thumb. The elite of capitalism wish to stand apart from the mass of humanity, as titans and utilitarian betters.

                • IzyaKatzmann [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Yeah that makes sense. Would you say that rich/elite can be more susceptible due to their lack of like ‘risk’? Which is just another way of describing material their wealth/resources?


                  Sorry for the wall of text, I’m just a bit curious about your thoughts.

                  I’m thinking to calculate susceptibility in a superficial way, for like success of marketing of the kind you mentioned; you get a person’s susceptibility by using their 1. temperament (individual/group/cultural differences), 2. their perceived material resources say abstracted with dollars, 3. their actual material resources again with dollars for convenience, 4. randomness/pseudo-randomness to account for uh whatever stuff we don’t know (if economists and population geneticists and sociologists can use it I will too!!)

                  There’d be another set of variables/factors based on like how much money was poured into a marketing campaign, relevance maybe, etc.


                  What I wanted to ask you actually, was, do you think that given this back-of-the-napkin model, would 2. be like, more often than not, the determining factor? Like would the perceived or actual resource of in terms of fiat money (so like an abstraction which can be adjusted when needed…) be more ‘significant’? Where significance is like a relative weighting of the two terms…

                  What really gets me is the “It’s a banana, how much could it cost?” and like recently when the Brtsh PM tried to buy stuff from a grocery checkout; the level of disconnect is just so much more that I think I could have imagined. If you gave a prize to like how out of touch, they are, I’m sure I’d be completely off the mark. So I’m trying to bridge that gap in understanding

                  Yeah, what do you think?

    • Mokey [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      10 months ago

      because you believe that everything china does is a lie or is a scam somehow even though all of that is true about your own country.

      honestly just thinking about it, megachurches and fucking mlms are fucking legitimate things to do here and we’re pointing fingers at china for being sneaky and corrupt

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because every word out of an American’s mouth regarding China is a lie. At least, any AVERAGE American.

      Why?

      Because Americans are very, very, VERY stupid.

  • invo_rt [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Lol, high-speed rail in the US is a joke. California’s HSR program started in 1996 and hasn’t produced anything substantial in nearly 30 years. They might be able to get 1/3 of Phase 1 into operation by 2030. It’s not even in discussion unless it’s bundled with some kind of meme shit like depressurized train tunnels and eliminating safety measures.

    In China, Deng started the Chinese HSR program around the same time and went from virtually none to being the world leader in kilometers of HSR with ~45,000 Km of operational HSR. To put that into perspective, that’s double the rest of the world combined. In fact, China has more HSR in construction than the rest of the world has active HSR today.

    deng-cowboy train-shining

    • hpca01@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s this thing called land ownership which is a right…the state can eminent domain them but they’d have to fight it in court.

      Doubt they have that in China, if your home is in the way of a planned development…it won’t be soon. You don’t buy land from the government there, it’s on a lease basis.

      That and everyone in politics has to be aligned. If the top down order is to build a HSR, no cog in the system can just slow shit down for the hell of it. Doesn’t work that way in the US, as witnessed by the myriad times that the government can never approve the budget before it’s due.

      • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What is hilarious about your argument is that it takes far more land to build and maintain a highway, and yet we somehow never had any problems with forcing land sales with eminent domain clauses doing that.

        It’s almost as if the government is owned by a series of interests that are not actually interested in investing and maintaining efficient consumption minimum and economical modes of transportation, and instead focused on making a system that is efficient at creating profit for it’s ownership class. It’s almost as if, instead of a focus on the money to commodity cycle, there is a perverse incentive for a money to commodity to money cycle that means there is no real incentive to ever substantially invest to improve your commodity production.

        Weird. curious-marx

        • hpca01@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          How many new highways do you see being built?? I’ve lived in California all my life and I’ve never seen a brand new highway being built. I’ve seen lanes expanded a few feet…But never a new one built.

          Also, you can’t just put rail tracks anywhere as you can with land.

          The politicians clearly work for reelection. Unfortunately, when a human being is placed in a position of power you usually get this kind of thing. Power corrupts.

          • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            The highways weren’t just magically placed there by the grace of God, they were built and expanded by the government using eminent domain. A highspeed rail system could be built using the same legal precedents, and would likely keep the highways from having to be expanded (ever).

            What you are saying is that we could never build a new system in the same way that we built the old system, which is patently false, which is still different from your claim that China can avoid red-tape when the U.S. does not which is also false. The U.S. picks and chooses when it decides to uphold ‘private property’ because it only cares about the private property of those that buy the political system, it demonstrably does not care about general private property rights of those that inconvenience whatever the agenda is. Which means that the agenda COULD be High Speed rail, and it is not ‘the law’ or ‘the government’ getting in the way but private companies.

            Also, for someone with a tenuous grasp on legal reality, I don’t think you should be discussing the realities of rail-based civil engineering. Highways aren’t particularly known for being good to work with on complex landscapes.

            I am saying that the literal incentives of a profit-driven capitalist economy will always inevitably degrade the commodity process, incentivizing profit generation and rent seeking over industrialization and economizing commodity processes. It has nothing to do with ‘corruption’, ‘power’ or ‘politicians’, nor did I ever indicate that is what we were talking about. It is the system working as intended.

      • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh I’ll just tell the poor Americans I know whose homes were bulldozed for transportation infrastructure that it didn’t happen because they could have fought it in court. Dumbass.

      • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        10 months ago

        Damn, it feels like your hypothetical system is designed to protect the interests of the rich and screw over the poor masses, and over time, increase the power the rich already have and further screw over the poor. I have some notes.

        Like can you imagine if such a system existed in the real world. If, say, they wanted to violate the “right” of land ownership for poor people to segregate cities by, idk, skin colour. They could separate them with massive, uncrossavle highways. The people that make cars and people who own oil fields will love that! The issue is that there may or may not be some poor people that live there. But even the ones that own land, well, they can be removed because of the system of eminent domain. Theoretically it’d also apply to the wealthy, so it looks like a fair system to the layman. But the rich can afford to take time off work and better lawyers. So on paper it sounds fair, but in practice, it favours those who are already wealthy!

        And it would feedback into even more advantages for the wealthy. All those highways will require cars, which is good, but cars need fuel. The fuel will need to be moved vast distances, your need a line of pipes from the oil fields! But that would once again require you to build a… “Line of pipes” across vast distances. But there are natives living along where those lines would go! And they theoretically benefit from the right to own land as well! And they’re disadvantaged due to being survivors of a genocide. Treaties or no, the lines will get out through their land, they can fight back but obviously they’re unlikely to win.

        This doesn’t seem like a well thought out system. The only other thing the rich would have to do is to own media and education. Then they can pump out articles and curriculum one after the other saying this system is the only system that works! They can even tell people, over multiple generations, that this the only way, that the right to land is a human right (not food or water though, that would cut into the profits of some other rich people, obviously). And make it legal for the rich to have a stranglehold on the government, call it something other than corruption, make it sound less harmful. Eventually you can erode the political structure to consist only of 2 groups of people who both agree with your “right” to land ownership, so even if the masses wanted to (which they don’t, thanks to media and education ;)), they literally can never change it

        Yeah imagine if this system existed irl. It’s a dystopia disguised as a normal country. And basically everyone in it would believe theres no other way, since any alternative has been demonized since before their grandparents were born.

        Genius, and evil

        • hpca01@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          You could have saved the wall of text and just said America is also bad…It is.

          When someone has power, power corrupts. It’s a tale as old as time.

          • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You’re almost there. The problem is not that power corrupts, by this logic there’s nothing you can do and every country is doomed. The issue is not individual, but collective.

            The problem is that the whole structure of the system is made for the interests of the wealthy that detain all the power and not for the hard working majority of people. Lobbying is the perfect example of that.

            And it’s not about good or bad, but simply colliding antagonic class interests where the class that holds the power always wins.

            It’s easy to get doomerish and think that people or power is the problem, that’s precisely the position the ruling class wants you to take because it keeps then safe and keeps us under their capitalistic boots.

            I invite you to read Marx. Once you understand the systemic root cause of the issues we see everyday, it’s truly freeing. I suggest the Communist Manifesto since it is really short and can get you the general grasp, just be aware that it’s language is very dated.

            Here are other good entry points:

            Why You Should be a Socialist in 2024 by Second Thought

            Will Life be Better Under Socialism? by Hakim

            How Capitalism sells poverty as modesty & why equality isn’t a practical goal. by Yugopnik

            • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Unless there is someone to patiently walk them through it, they will not understand Marx trying to read it themselves. It’s pretty clear from their lazy reading, sloppy replies and fall back on cliches they are either taking the piss or mildly literate at best.

              No progress will be made from self-education on this one imo, particularly with something as not completely modern as Marx. Maybe ABC’s of Socialism.

              • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                I get what you’re saying but I don’t think this person is just trying to take the piss on us, from what I read here they look like just another misinformed liberal.

                You’re completely right about the rest tho, I usually suggest easier entry points like some stuff by the Deprogram boys, I don’t know why I didn’t do that this time.

                When I suggested Marx I was more thinking about the manifesto since, while it’s language is very dated, it is still good enough to start and get a grasp while being extremely short, but I should have said that in the comment too.

          • jaeme@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It’s a tale as old as time.

            Liberals trying not to essentialize political systems into supposed “common” human culture in order to retroactively justify their own decaying societies impossible challenge.

            American exceptionalism brain mf (and that’s me being nice).

      • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        10 months ago

        Doesn’t work that way in the US, as witnessed by the myriad times that the government can never approve the budget before it’s due.

        “Our government is slow and inefficient can’t take decisions in a timely manner (especially if it’s decisions that benefit everyone at the expence of a fingernail of the bottomline of some rich dickhead for some reason ), that’s how you know it’s truely democratic”

        • hpca01@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Unfortunately it’s not democratic…It’s a representative democracy where the representation is horrible. Yes, I’m no fan of the way the country is.

        • hpca01@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          And everyone is free to fight you in court and sue the shit out of you if they find a flaw in your design.

          Btw, don’t you think that there are others that want to stay but didn’t get a chance to? It’s just the one dude who gets no water or electricity? No one else wanted to stay in the whole neighborhood?

          What do you think happened before nail houses?

          • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            10 months ago

            don’t you think that there are others that want to stay but didn’t get a chance to?

            Making a supposition that maybe there was doesn’t make it true. If you think there is you need to prove it, a claim made without proof can be rejected without proof.

          • RollaD20 [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            And everyone is free to fight you in court and sue the shit out of you if they find a flaw in your design.

            “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”

            Wonder how wealth plays into the material reality of going to court. phoenix-think

            How many of those lawsuits against eminent domain in the USA were successful btw?

      • TC_209 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        10 months ago

        There’s this thing called tribal sovereignty, which is a right. Doubt they have that in the US; if your tribe is in the way of a planned settlement… it won’t be soon.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        10 months ago

        So…it’s a good thing when someone can torpedo a massive infrastructure project that will benefit millions just because they don’t feel like selling “their” land? Because they have a slip of paper that says they own a bunch of land, they can personally decide whether or not millions of people have access to public transport? Is that the argument you’re making? That capitalism is a superior system because someone who is rich and powerful enough can inconvenience or even destroy the lives of millions just cause they can?

      • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Doubt they have that in China, if your home is in the way of a planned development…it won’t be soon.

        [citation needed]

        In fact there are many exemples of the opposite happening, China having to build around something because the person(s) refused to move and China didn’t force them to.

        • BovineUniversity@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          10 months ago

          IIRC, you can say no to private development but not to the state. Either way you’re well compensated if you give up your land.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah, technically the state owns all land, including the land that holds both personal and private property, so they are free to use that ownership, but they are also required to compensate the people who own property on the land. This is basically just a rephrasing of Eminent Domain.

        • hpca01@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes I can flip a coin and half the time it lands on heads I can then claim that heads is always going to be the outcome of all coin flips.

          I worked with a guy back in the day who was a dual citizen and owned homes back there. They were far ahead of us in terms of transportation, payments and conveniences. He went back every year for a month to party, even taking a few of us along.

          All those nail houses you see are homes near roads, do you see one in the way of a HSR? You can’t build a HSR around a home like you can with a road.

      • BovineUniversity@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah you can’t get in the way of public development in China. If they want to run a rail through your house they’ll give you a fat stack of cash and move you into a nice new apartment. The system works.

  • FnordPrefect [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    10 months ago

    Paragon of poor economic choices

    smuglord “I mean its economics 101! If you always actually complete things instead of just throwing money at rich assholes, eventually you’re gonna run out of projects that need doing. And where is your economy going to be then? That’s right stonks-down

    • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It was less smug, but I basically received this argument from one of my brothers when I tried to explain that China is (probably) striving towards a future where it’s good enough for capital to do things people need instead of making financial profits.

      Edit: I’m always open to the possibility that I’m an idiot, but it really seemed like he had never considered the possibility that resources could be used to directly meet needs. I’m not feeling like I was the one being stupid.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        Seems like standard capitalism apologia to me. Just absurd statements about how helping people is actually bad somehow and that society is better off if everyone is suffering. And it’s so far off base from things like basic empathy that it sounds unbelievable, especially when it comes out of people we care about.

  • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    10 months ago

    This guy’s Twitter is the definition of bazinga: just endless posts of how everything can be solved with cool magic future tech. I’m shocked he actually admitted the Hyperloop is a failure.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It sounds like he’s saying the hyperloop failed because of drama and external reasons. Not because it was, in essence, a fictional project never meant to worm.

  • SkingradGuard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    10 months ago

    The vacuum train thing is honestly a waste and is incredibly dangerous, but the fact that China has progressed further than Musk at the testing phase, all the while improving their public train transportation network to be the best in the world, is just chefs-kiss

  • betelgeuse [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    10 months ago

    “My tech evangelism job failed so now please buy my story as book, streaming show, or straight-to-streaming movie about the wacky inner workings of Hyperloop!”

  • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    10 months ago

    I know they mean it was all done domestically but I still think the use of the word homemade is funny.

    Just some random Chinese bros hanging out in their garage tinkering with their maglev hypertrain.