Trouble is, when you need to get to the middle of nowhere is when you need transportation. If you stay within the densely populated areas where the people live you can walk. That's why people stopped living in rural areas after all; so that one didn't have to rely on transportation. Don't forget that rural areas had trains back before the urbanization movement! Passenger rail in the US died out because people moved closer together so that they didn't need mechanized travel.
The Netherlands, while technically highly urbanized, has remained more like a bunch of small towns instead of a few highly populated cities like as is seen in the US, so it is much closer to the rural days of yore when the US was able to support a comprehensive, nation-wide passenger rail system.
> The Netherlands, while technically highly urbanized, has remained more like a bunch of small towns instead of a few highly populated cities like as is seen in the US, so it is much closer to the rural days of yore when the US was able to support a comprehensive, nation-wide passenger rail system.
Looking at population density if you draw a 50km radius in the Netherlands you get about 8m people. This covers lots of small cities etc. In the US you get maybe 5m in a contiguous city like Phoenix (which fills the circle) or the Bay Area. (LA is more dense and you might get 10m.)
Transit works much better in the Netherlands and much of Europe because those homes and job centres are not as evenly spaced as they are in most American cities since they developed more around public transport existing. S the effective density experienced is much higher.
> Transit works much better in the Netherlands and much of Europe because those homes and job centres are not as evenly spaced as they are in most American cities since they developed more around public transport existing.
Much more the opposite. European settlements were largely established before the train existed, emerging from outward rural growth rather than seeing an active urbanization movement. Trains have been woven into that after the fact to best support the rural-esq population shape.
Whereas America was built by the train. Established originally to support the same rural-esq shape idea, but, with little in the way of existing settlements, the train ended up enabling the people to purposefully congregate rather than simply expand outward, which allowed those congregations to be designed such that transportation was unnecessary; being the whole appeal of leaving friends and family behind to move into those settlements. The passenger train eventually started dying out at the height of the urbanization movement because there was no longer a mass benefit from it like the was, and continues to be, in Europe and other places that grew up in those earlier times.
Or even own a car, which is what most people do. The problem is already solved. But with any solution comes those who think they can do it better (who, when given the chance to try their alternative, in most cases only end up learning why the existing solution was the way it was, but that is another topic for another day).
Yeah thats a useful factor for all those "visiting mom in Portland" trips from Washington DC that a train is obviously meant to replace, not any of those "100 mi or less visits to mom" that de facto MUST be taken in a car regardless of the population density of the surrounding 100mi radius.
Also we should ignore the fact that the US already had a national rail network and STILL DOES for freight and had frequent regional rail service to even incredibly small podunk nowhere towns for decades. It's clearly impossible! We're too big! IT CAN'T BE DONE!
Where I live now to where my mom lives would take 24 to 30 hours by train and cost 400 to 500 usd. At 30mpg and $5/gal, the cost of driving is $200 and takes 12h. So I can take a train for double the time and cost or I can drive. Now consider round trip and passenger. It's 40 miles either side to get to a train. Neither side has a walkable city so being without a car sucks. Summer in one is hot as hell, winter in the other is frozen hell. Tell me again how trains are a viable option?
They aren't for you, apparently. Too bad. I guess no one gets one since it doesn't work for your use case and life in particular.
And nothing says the train must take 30 hours. 12H of highway driving is what, 600 miles? 1000? The slowest high speed rail lines in China have a design speed of 120mph. Some go 240mph. So that 600 mile trip could take 5 hours. The 1000 mile trip could take 8 and some change. Add in an hour or so to account for stops.
Like, I struggle to imagine how every goddamn conversation I have about rail in the US ends up like this, with someone mistaking my "heres what COULD be" with a comparison to "here's what IS". Do you not think that someone advocating for trains doesn't understand how crappy they are right now? That I'm advocating you take the train despite all of the reasons you mentioned its awful? Do you think the fact that tickets can command that price despite taking 30 hours indicates a latent demand?
The vast size of the country sounds like an argument for trains, rather than against it? Trains are a comparatively cheap way to provide fast transportation between places where people actually live.
Not really. Over short-to-medium distances rail and air have similar door-to-door times, but as a country grows vast and travel is much more likely to happen over long distances then rail is much less compelling. Which means smaller ridership, which makes it difficult to support operations.
The US already had the nation-wide passenger rail system. At one time it was the envy of the world. It'd still be here if the riders were. But they moved on to newer technologies better suited to the landscape.
Technically a large landmass, but essentially nothing happens in the western half. For the sake of travel it is a relatively small country. Whereas NY->LA is the route the USA would need to most service if it were to get serious about such a thing. The short-run corridors are already reasonably well serviced.
Trouble is most people doing the NY->LA run are going to choose flight instead.
People would absolutely choose trains over flying if we actually had modern train infrastructure. NY to LA would be about 11 hours at 250 MPH. That's 100 MPH slower than the fastest passenger train, but seems like a reasonable estimate for an average speed including stops. The difference between chilling on public transit for 8 hours and chilling on public transit for 11 hours is not that big of a deal for most people. Driving is essentially not an option for most people for this trip too.
There are no trains in regular service that operate at anywhere close to those speeds. There are trains technically capable of doing it (and much more), sure, but the economics quickly stop making sense when you start pushing that much air. And flight still gets you there meaningfully faster, door-to-door, even if there were people theoretically willing to pay excessively to reach 250 mph, so there is still no reason for those who need to prioritize time to take the train.
> The difference between chilling on public transit for 8 hours and chilling on public transit for 11 hours is not that big of a deal for most people.
Of course, most people have no reason to travel from NY->LA in the first place. Especially not on a regular basis. The primary users will be business customers and they tend to be quite time sensitive. Furthermore, even if there was that 250 mph train, it is unlikely that it would beat air on price, so those who don't care about time are still apt to choose the cheapest option. At best there is a small segment of people who are both willing to give up their time and spend more just to avoid flying, but you can't realistically make trains work with a small number of riders.
> Technically a large landmass, but essentially nothing happens in the western half.
Depends what you mean by "western half," I suppose, but China is definitely not a relatively small country. Shanghai to Chongqing is about the same distance as Chicago to Dallas; Beijing to Kunming is about the same as D.C. to Denver.
As someone who’s owned a Tesla since 2018, and was part of the early beta program, I at least have a better understanding of the tech than most random folks who don’t actually drive one daily. Also, I’m not a fan of Elon at all.
It is easily one of the best if not the top three in the world (I’m including the Chinese companies like BYD, but we can’t get those in the US).
I can say “navigate to the closest publix”, it will back out of my garage, and then drive there the whole way hands off, find a parking spot, and park.
Tesla’s robotaxi sq mileage is roughly 1100 miles vs Waymo’s 475. This is true autonomous no safety driver in the car.
So jokes aside, Tesla is leagues ahead of everyone else sans maybe some of the state funded Chinese car brands. Having actually used the tech daily for years, it’s incredible, truly.
Yeah, it is very good, but that’s only in roughly 1100 sq miles in the US. The long tail of edge cases is exponentially harder than the rest of it. They’re improving quite quickly was my point, and if anyone stands to pull it off, I’d bet on them pulling it off first.
The island of New Guinea is one of the most biodiverse places on earth. It hosts roughly 7% of all global species, with 60% of them being endemic. Peopled by Melanesians, it's one of the most linguistically diverse places on earth, with over 1000 languages.
The east of the island became independent (from Australia) in 1975 and is now Papua New Guinea. Meanwhile, the western half was handed over to Indonesian control following the end of Dutch rule, a status formalized through the controversial, UN-backed 1969 "Act of Free Choice" in which a tiny, handpicked group of local leaders voted under military duress to integrate with Indonesia.
Indonesia has been conducting a decades-long genocide of the people of West Papua. It gets little press because it's an ethnic cleansing slow-burn. Slaughter the Papuan people, replace them with Javanese, then bulldoze their forests to grow palm oil.
It's ignored because Indonesia annexed West Papua when it was a Soviet client.
When it annexed East Timor later, it had switched to being a US client. So this second annexation received a great deal of bad press - including, critically, the Australian far left, whose campaign led to Australia pressuring Indonesia to let it intervene militarily in 1999.
>It gets little press because it's an ethnic cleansing slow-burn.
Is it not rather down to identity? If the victims had paler skin and a different religion, we'd never stop hearing about it. But unfortunately for Papuans their complexion is too dark for international media to care and the perperators are with "You-Know-Who".
They're probably only comparing open protocols. If one doesn't care if their protocol is proprietary then sure one might consider zwave. But it's hardly "surprising" that it's left out.
What? The entire specification is in this git repo maintained by the home assistant team. Also, they’re on the zwave board now. It’s wholly open, but wasn’t maybe 4-5 years ago.
You pay to have it tested and certified to use the trademark. This is why so much zwave kit from different vendors works perfectly where as zigbee it’s more of a crap shoot if different vendor’s gear works well together.
Because zwave is proprietary. There's money to be made here! Can you imagine the lost profit potential if people standardize on an open protocol like ZigBee?
Most likely it's not a super robust transmission mode like LoRa (that works down to -145dBm). Having a well designed antenna with a good pattern help a lot then.
I'd like to use z-wave but as an Australian we have different allowed frequency bands (specifically the USA-market gear uses frequencies that are reserved for telecom use over here, and anything that can interfere with the ability to call emergency services is Very Illegal), and thus the few devices that get built supporting the AU rf bands are overly expensive due to the (lack of) economy of scale.
As a result my home automation stack is a mix of zigbee, Matter (over both Wifi and Thread), and just plain WiFi. All of which uses the 2.4Ghz (and 5Ghz but mostly 2.4 for the IoT stuff) ISM band(s) and is thus cheap and plentiful.
Not sure how many other regions suffer the same issues, but I suspect that z-wave will be outcompeted by the more modern alternatives in the coming years.
Hey mate, Z-Wave in Australia operates on the 919.8 MHz regional frequency, which is different from the US (908.4 MHz) or Europe (868.4 MHz). They have AU certified zwave kit.
That was my main gripe - AU z-wave kit exists, but since we can't share devices with the USA (or as I understand between regions in general e.g. UK, USA, and AUS z-wave are mutually incompatible) the range of products in AUS region is severely limited, and the ones that are released here are far more expensive than the USA region equivalents (after adjusting for currency conversion) due to the smaller volume of manufacture.
Whereas you can pick up a zigbee or thread device, put it down on a different continent, and after pairing etc. it'll just work.
Yes, zwave is in the much less congested 900mhz range. It is a fair bit more reliable as it doesn’t compete with:
- WiFi
- Bluetooth
- microwave ovens
Additionally, it’s a bit more strict with certification so you can easily use multiple vendors for zwave whereas with zigbee it’s often a terrible experience since vendors implement things differently in ways that are not as interoperable. In fact, for a device to be certified by the zwave alliance, it must pass strict conformance testing to ensure backwards compatibility and interoperability.
All it costs is significantly more money and less options.
If you limit your pool of zigbee devices to just more reputable companies, you'll end up with around the same amount of options as zwave and they'll be reliable but significantly cheaper.
You also have the option to find some super cheap stuff that works just fine. That usually requires some research but not much. You can also build ESPHome devices for zigbee but that's pretty niche, to say the least.
Having previously been all zwave then moved and tried to go matter but ended up with zigbee, I wish I never listened to people saying what you are. As far as I'm concerned, zwave doesn't know it's dead yet and Matter isn't going to fulfill it's promises because the corporate interests that wouldn't give you local control with zigbee aren't suddenly going to change their minds because it says matter now.
My entire “smart” home setup is built with Matter over Thread. It’s fully local. No internet access required. With Home Assistant onboarding can be done without a smartphone now. Devices without official certification work but probably only in Home Assistant.
My Matter over Thread stuff keeps occasionally falling over in Home Assistant and becoming unavailable, probably a router issue as I’m using a homepod mini but still endlessly frustrating.
I’m using ZBT-2 with HAOS on RPi 4 4GB. It’s rock solid in a crowded apartment complex. Devices are 90% IKEA and 10% Aqara. Definitely try that antenna and don’t connect additional border routers. Let HA own everything.
My whole setup is, suboptimal, to put it delicately. It’s just running on a NUC that’s crammed inside my AV cabinet, antennas would be crammed in there as well. I mostly buy zigbee stuff but it’s hard to ignore how cheap the Ikea Matter over Thread kit is.
Dunno, personally I have found HA + MoT to be strictly worse than Z2M. It's the classic case of the Douglas Adams quote:
“The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair."
HA MoT has a simplified UI, that hides hellish complexity underneath, that's held together by loose pieces of gum, which means its difficult to troubleshoot. HA has a rather laissez faire policy to stability, for example, they rolled out an update just recently that made it impossible to add new devices.
I just readded yday evening my Ikea temp sensors as they mysteriously stopped working for no reason. Why? Who knows, but you can't ship stuff like this to a non-technical audience, especially if they rely on it. I had it connected as the temp sensor of my AC, and was surprised to find the AC was not working, thats how I found out it suicided itself.
I never had any problems with Thread that couldn’t be fixed by pulling batteries from a crashed Ikea device and I have very little interest in how the protocol works.
Automatic updates in Home Assistant are disabled by default for a reason. It’s not an ultra polished, safe corporate environment for non technical wives and children.
Which sensor? Battery powered temp/humidity sensor or USB-C powered air quality monitor?
I’m asking because the battery powered one is known to be bad. They disconnect and refuse to connect again until their batteries are pulled for ~10 seconds. It’s a device problem, not Thread problem.
But Matter _is_ locally-controlled. Matter-over-Thread is better as there's no side channels to abuse; Matter-over-Wifi also guarantees local control though the presence of Wifi means a high probability of some additional onboard software bloat the manufacturer can use to enshittify the product if you're not careful.
This is both good and bad, and no surprise its an American standard. Lower frequencies have higher range, which is good if you live in a house (because range), and bad if you live in an apartment (because interference and crowded channels). So it will compete with itself, and everything on the ISM band (which you have no control over).
Zwave frequencies, as well as regulations, vary between countries/regions. This means that equipment isn't interchangeable, something I'm currently running into - I can't get a zwave electronic door lock for Japan while I could easily have bought one in my home country. But I wouldn't be able to bring it if I wanted to.
Zigbee is basically the same everywhere, however the 2.4GHz band is of course somewhat congested.
I’m 42, never went to college (I joined the army) and am now a Principal Security Engineer at a serious computer security firm. I’ve got a background in Linux high performance computing and software engineering.
If I can do this, anyone can. I believe in you internet friend. In tech, every day’s a school. Embrace it and learn something new daily, or get left behind. You’ve got this
Oh yes, because the well documented clean syntax of sys v init shell scripts was so nice.
If I never recall hacking in ulimit calls in the top of buggy shell scripts for crappy old services that done respect pam_limits it won’t be soon enough.
reply