this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
1219 points (99.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

9712 readers
1770 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world -4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

Edit: Unfortunately despite everyone's bitching, including a very helpful friendly neighborhood train autist, we still have no better answers for how much it would cost with regular google providing wildly different answers, so good chance the below listed information is still correct given the relatively okay, but not robust sauce.

Per ChatGPT how much would it cost to interconnect all major cities with high speed rail in the usa:

Good question — there’s no single authoritative number, but based on past studies and real U.S. projects we can make some rough-order estimates of what it might cost to “interconnect all major U.S. cities” with a true high-speed rail (HSR) network — and the result tends to be in the hundreds of billions to low-trillions of dollars. Here’s how one might arrive at such a figure, with major caveats.

🔎 What we know already: cost per mile is very high

  • Building HSR tracks in the U.S. is extremely expensive. For example, in California High-Speed Rail (CA-HSR), costs per mile have been estimated as high as ~ US$200 million per mile for full, 220 mph-class track. (Hoover Institution)
  • Not all rail needs to be brand-new dedicated track. For less ambitious upgrades (e.g. improving existing rail corridors to somewhat higher speeds) cost estimates are much lower: in one case, upgrading ~3,000 miles of track was estimated at about US$7.7 billion — ~US$2.5 million per mile. (Congress.gov)
  • A 2009 federal assessment noted a wide variation: while dedicated high-speed lines might cost tens of millions per mile (for example a projected HSR line between Los Angeles area and Las Vegas was estimated at about US$22 million to US$48 million per mile depending on route/terrain).

So the cost per mile can vary by more than an order of magnitude — depending on whether the rail is new vs upgraded, terrain, urban vs rural, tunneling/bridges, land acquisition cost, station infrastructure, electrification, signaling, etc.


🌐 What “connect all major cities” might mean — and how much track that could require

Estimating a U.S.-wide high-speed network depends a great deal on how one defines “major cities” and the level of connectivity (hub-and-spoke? dense mesh?). But even a modest network that connects perhaps 30–50 of the largest metropolitan areas would likely require tens of thousands of route-miles of new or upgraded track.

Past proposals give some sense of scale:

  • A plan studied by U.S. federal authorities once envisioned about 12,800 miles of passenger-rail corridors (not necessarily full HSR), with an early cost projection of ~USD 50 billion for a “moderate-speed” rail system — but that projected cost does not apply to full-speed, dedicated HSR. (Downsizing the Federal Government)
  • Analysts skeptical of HSR argue that a true nationwide high-speed rail network (serving many states and major cities with dedicated track) could cost US$500 billion to US$1 trillion — and once you “fill in all gaps,” perhaps close to US$1 trillion or more. (BLE-T)

💡 What a plausible ballpark cost looks like today

Because of all the variation, any large-scale estimate must come with wide error bounds. But a rough range:

  • If you built a “skeleton” network — connecting major city clusters using mostly upgraded existing tracks and selective new segments — costs might run hundreds of billions of dollars (e.g. US$300–600 billion).
  • If you instead built a more ambitious, high-speed, dedicated-track network linking most major cities (think “bullet-train everywhere”), costs could easily reach US$700 billion to over US$1 trillion, possibly more depending on scope, geography, and how modern you demand the system to be.

Indeed, some conservative projections see ~US$1 trillion as a realistic floor for a comprehensive U.S. HSR system. (BLE-T)


⚠️ Why the uncertainty is so large — and what could drive cost up or down

  • Terrain & urban density: Building through mountains, hills, or densely populated urban areas (especially with tunnels/viaducts, land acquisition) dramatically increases per-mile costs (as seen in CA-HSR). (Hoover Institution)
  • Shared vs dedicated tracks: Upgrading existing tracks for “higher-speed” is far cheaper than building new dedicated corridors — but yields slower speeds and sometimes lower ridership. (Congress.gov)
  • Inflation, regulatory, environmental mitigation, stations, electrification, signaling, rolling stock, maintenance facilities: all add huge extra costs over just laying track. U.S. costs historically have run much higher than many international systems for comparable projects. (High Speed Rail Alliance)
  • Ambition & coverage: A minimal network with only a few corridors is much cheaper; a dense mesh covering dozens of metro areas raises costs steeply.
  • Political, legal, and land-rights hurdles: In the U.S., acquiring rights-of-way, dealing with local regulations, environmental reviews, and community opposition tend to add delays and cost overruns — as seen with CA-HSR. (U.S. Government Accountability Office)

🎯 Bottom line: It’s possible — but very expensive

If the U.S. decided to connect all major cities with a modern high-speed rail network (dedicated tracks, fast speeds, nationwide coverage), a realistic cost estimate is likely in the range of several hundred billion to over a trillion dollars (in today’s dollars).

If you like, I can run a rough “back-of-envelope” estimate: pick, say, the 50 biggest U.S. metro areas, lay out hypothetical direct HSR connections, and compute a total cost estimate — to show you concretely what “major-city-wide national HSR” might cost under different assumptions (cheap upgrades vs full build). Do you want me to build that estimate now?

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Per ChatGPT

I don't want to read what chatgpt says. if I did, I'd go to it, not lemmy.

jfc the laziest tryhard - when you could find all this info with normal search, but you're chuffed because it gives you a big bullet buble filled response to a query you could and should have summarized in a few sentences.

blech

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I get some of the hate and am concerned about all the bad shit related to ai and it's social and environmental impact, but I don't get the complete and utter hatred towards it like this.

I mean this:

when you could find all this info with normal search

Yeah, I don't have a few hours to scour research docs on the Internet to figure out what the cost would be.. Its not like just a "normal search" will give you a proper idea without taking the time to research the subject.

I got less out of your bitching about CGPT than I did out of the CGPT response.

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You didn’t research anything at all, you were told what to think and obeyed.

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're totally right, I asked my ai overlord and it said I should tell you that. Now I'm going to go felate it because it told me to and I need to obey.

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, yeah, that is exactly what you did, you being sarcastic about it doesn’t change that.

Oh no, I don't know how to feel about this, Chatgpt, baby, please tell me how I should feel.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I got less out of your bitching about CGPT than I did out of the CGPT response.

that's fine, no one cares about your opinion.

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

don't you have an llm to fellate somewhere else?

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The important thing is that CGPT did not inconvenience you personally by any of the other myriad pitfalls that isn't worth mentioning because you are not experiencing them at this moment. Trust the convenience and Obey!

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why are you partaking in capitalism if you are against it? Your phone is made with rare earth minerals mined by people in indentured servitude, working in the worst conditions. Why do you have one and use it? Literally the way the fediverse works wastes resources by mass duplication, and most of it is run on American cloud providers that do horrible things. Why are you using it? Why are you here?

This rhetoric is played out and lame.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's a difference between engaging in capitalism to gain an advantage and buying junk food to satiate your hunger because it is convenient.

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And you don't buy fast food? Fish that isn't line caught? Meat that isn't factory farmed? Cruelty free eggs?

This is stupid, like I said.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You can focus on the morality but I was trying to bring your attention to the personal health aspect of the product.

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Brain health or environmental? The latter is a complete fuck up.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Heh in true AI fashion it said a lot of words to give very little actual information, references the highest profile new rail infrastructure project but then conflates that with a proposed plan to simply add passenger trains to existing freight corridors (and of course upgrade existing infrastructure as needed in the process)

The best part is, if you wanted a realistic plan for improving North American passenger rail network all you have to do is ask your friendly neighborhood train autist and you'd get a far more informative answer than whatever the heck this is.

Hey, here's that informative answer from a friendly neighborhood train autist: the biggest barrier to passenger rail (and any actual improvements to the rail network for that matter) is the freight railroads, and the biggest thing freight railroads hate it's investing in infrastructure. If we're making talking ambitious the very first thing that needs to be done is nationalizing the entire rail network. Remove the freight railroads from the equation because they can and do quarrel with passenger service providers regularly because a freight train carrying raw materials for a factory in Albuquerque had to pull into a siding to let today's Cardinal passed (a 3 times a week train!) so take away their control so passenger trains can be correctly prioritized.

Its also worth noting railroad law is based on so many dusty old 19th century laws paid for by the Robber Barrons of the day that are somehow still on the books and painfully difficult to work through in a legal manner, so having a strong federal government ready to legally smack down the freight railroads is critical to such an endeavor.

Next, an analysis needs to be performed of what cities are currently connected to the rail network that can easily have a station opened and regain passenger service, creating many new routes on the existing rails. While those stations are being built/refurbished an order needs to be placed with a major manufacturer of rolling stock for new passenger cars. It needs to be structured to ensure enough business for the rolling stock manufacturer that they can maintain a production facility indefinitely. Make it easy for regional, local and private operators to also order rolling stock, maybe even develop 2-3 standard cars that all new passenger stock can be based on to keep things simple and cheap, occasionally refreshing the design as needed to maintain modernity

Finally, as those new passenger services over existing freight trackage are being stood up, new passenger corridors for new trackage needs to be identified so that ground can break and work can begin. Again, being federally owned rails this cuts past a ton of red tape and makes this process much easier.

With this process, most of the country can be connected to passenger service within a decade just by using existing rails and patching up the biggest barriers to passenger service. The freight railroads will kick and screen because how dare Union Pacific be expected to let BNSF or heaven forbid CPKC have any trackage rights through Moffat Tunnel for example, and all will want to hang onto their key passes and not allow any other railroad to use them to maintain their local monopolies. That's a game of politics beyond the scope of this comment. But importantly, nationalizing the network will make any blocking freight railroads try to do completely impotent, and building up a proper national passenger equipment pool will ensure the the network can run the passenger services it wants and needs to run without the limitations of finding equipment to run it

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

Thanks friendly neighborhood train autist!

Now going back on track... huehuehue, did you have any solid sauce on actual costs estimates? The initial google was wildly different, with anywhere from 10 million to 500 million per mile. Which to a layperson like me, seems vastly inflated, but top sources and AI was able to more or less verify, and might even be giving even lower numbers than actual.

Per mile, the New York project cost $2.6 billion, which is high even by U.S. standards. For example, the Purple Line in Los Angeles cost $800 million per mile. By international standards, the New York price tag is stratospheric: A project in Madrid cost $320 million per mile, and one in Paris cost just $160 million per mile.

https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/hpaq1r/average_cost_per_km_of_high_speed_rail/

https://www.hsrail.org/blog/why-transit-projects-cost-more-in-the-u-s-than-almost-anywhere-else-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/

https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1mej6ix/cmv_it_is_not_cost_effective_to_biuld_high_speed/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_States

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Gets a lot more expensive when there's corruption and intentional delays so some extract more money for as long as it keeps going on.

A few months ago The Laughing Auditor ( https://www.youtube.com/@thelaughingauditor/videos ) had spoken on the street to someone who happened to work on HS2 (alas, I failed to find the specific video again), and he said it was nothing like any other job he had ever worked on. It was like they (the upper bosses and politicians) didn't want to complete it.

Did your LLM bilge take that kind of thing into account? Could be work asking it about that, and to reconsider the situation.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

They generally can't parse information from videos from my understanding. It's decently well sourced, and just like the other person said, a quick google gave wildly different opinions on prices, so this is a great starting point.

Even our friendly neighborhood train autist gave zero pricing lmfao.