this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
57 points (91.3% liked)

Technology

78661 readers
3623 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] elgordino@fedia.io 26 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The trouble with the railways comparison is that after investing tons of cash the railways were built. With AI the GPUs have no value after 6 years (if that). So the investment must continue forever. It’s madness.

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago

The other trouble with the railways comparison is that trains actually work and can generate a profit for their owners.

[–] RockBottom@feddit.org 12 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Railways? Good example of tech abandoned in favor of something else.

[–] kikutwo@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Huh? Rail handles about 40% of long distance freight in the US.

[–] RockBottom@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But I want to know the tech that will replace 60 % of AI.

[–] kikutwo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe quantum dunno

[–] tal@lemmy.today 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Like, the automobile? It looks like the boom in the UK they were talking about was in the 1840s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Mania

Railway Mania was a stock market bubble in the railway industry of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in the 1840s.

There were primitive automobiles earlier, but the mass market automobile didn't come around for a long time after that, and then it'll have taken longer to get substantial marlet penetration.

searches

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42182497

It runs a bit off the edge


I don't know how far back they had licensing and mileage data.

1000009354

But extrapolating from those lines, I'd guess that annual distance traveled in the UK in autos on roads surpassed rail only in the 1940s or so, about a hundred years later.

That's probably outside the investment horizon of people investing in the 1840s


in evaluating whether an investment is worthwhile, they won't be considering returns a century hence.

That being said, it is possible to maybe consider freight rail, and it's possible that that works out differently. The US doesn't use much passenger rail in 2025, but it does do quite a bit of freight rail; the two can be decoupled.

EDIT: It can't be too much earlier that road traffic could have risen, though, since mass-market motor vehicles weren't much earlier than that.

[–] RockBottom@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean a hundred years is not much for a technology your government decides to build society around.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean, in that kind of timeframe, there were pretty major shifts in transportation.

For a long, long time, ships up rivers and along coasts was the way serious transportation happened.

Then we had the canal-building era in the US. I assume that the UK did the same.

searches

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_age

Technology archaeologists and industrial historians date the American Canal Age from 1790 to 1855[1] based on momentum and new construction activity, since many of the older canals, although limited by locks that restricted boat sizes below the most economic capacities[b], nonetheless continued in service well into the twentieth century.[c]

By 1855, canals were no longer the civil engineering work of first resort, for it was nearly always better—cheaper to build a railroad above ground than it was to dig a watertight ditch 6–8 feet (2–3 m) deep and provide it with water and make annual repairs for ice and freshet damages—even though the cost per ton mile on a canal was often cheaper in an operational sense, canals couldn't be built along hills and dales, nor backed into odd corners, as could a railroad siding.

So that was maybe sixty, seventy years before rail was really displacing it.

EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to get at is that I don't think that rail had a uniquely short era where it was the prime, go-to option compared to other transportation technologies...and I don't think I'd say that the golden era was short enough to make the technology not a worthwhile investment, even if it was later, in significant part, superseded. A hundred years is a long time to wait around without engine-driven transportation, which would have been the alternative.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago

Laughs in European

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 6 points 2 weeks ago

They picked the wrong history, in my not so humble opinion. The AI situation looks more like the dot-com bubble, recycled.

[–] multiplewolves@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

What’s the original link? The archive won’t load for me.

Edit: I got hit with a captcha that wouldn’t load in DDG mobile. I opened it on a desktop and I have it now.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

How? Archive even loads in Dillo, in a no JS mode.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

500 error, that's service-side

Usually from too many requests for the server to handle

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)
[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Probably not tbh, sometimes it's just a hug-of-death

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The main difference between the two is intention.