▲ 639 ▼ Low quality cropping will officially launch on Lemmy in 2025 after passing budget evaluation (lemmy.world) submitted 1 year ago* by ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 197 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Ek-Hou-Van-Braai@piefed.social -13 points 1 year ago (4 children) I think we should relax rules on how quickly it is to evaluate a plane, and focus more on keeping the plane in the sky. (looking at you Boeing) I'd love sleeping pods or bunk beds on a plane and accept the higher risk of not being able to get out quickly. Cars and probably even train are infinitely more dangerous and we accept those risks every day. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Saleh@feddit.org 33 points 1 year ago (1 child) There is no legitimate reason why trains or cars should be more dangerous modes of transport than flights. It is just that the lobbies for cars and capitalist train operations successfully desensitized everyone to it, so "deadly car crash" is just shrugged away. In the US we see similar attempts to make planes less safe and just accept the numbers of people killed in preventable events. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 32 points 1 year ago (2 children) IDK about trains, but the problem with cars is that we let people operate them with minimal training and practically no oversight. You see shit on roads daily where if the driver was flying a plane, they wouldn't even be let on as a passenger anymore ever. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Saleh@feddit.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. We could design road-networks in a way that makes speeding more difficult and enact stricter speed limits. Whenever these measures are taking in an area they greatly reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. I wish. And who's going to tell all those people that they are not going to drive again, ever? In pilot training, even showing signs of bravado or machismo is grounds for getting failed. The problem is that if you do that those people will go and vote you out, especially in this climate. One of the main campaign promises of the idiot who got the most votes in the last Dutch election was to put the speed limits back to 130 kmh from the reduced 100 kmh on motorways. People like to be dumb. BTW it would take minimal effort to enforce highway speed limits with cameras checking entry and exit times and distances. In some places with road tolls, it wouldn't even need any more data collection. A single SQL query would return all those people doing 100 kmh over on the motorways. Wonder why outside of a few outliers, nobody does it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vala@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago This would make people so mad though. permalink fedilink source parent [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] owl@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago I don't think loosening regulations in one place will help in other places. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) And if we are making rules about exiting a plane it should apply to when the plane lands normally. There is absolutely no reason it takes 30+ mints to get the fuck off the plane once we've arrived at the gate permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friendlymessage@feddit.org 5 points 1 year ago* That would mean getting rid of carry-on and deploying emergency chutes every time which costs 10s of thousands to replace each time and grounds the plane for weeks. Makes sense. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago Why not both? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Saleh@feddit.org 33 points 1 year ago (1 child) There is no legitimate reason why trains or cars should be more dangerous modes of transport than flights. It is just that the lobbies for cars and capitalist train operations successfully desensitized everyone to it, so "deadly car crash" is just shrugged away. In the US we see similar attempts to make planes less safe and just accept the numbers of people killed in preventable events. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 32 points 1 year ago (2 children) IDK about trains, but the problem with cars is that we let people operate them with minimal training and practically no oversight. You see shit on roads daily where if the driver was flying a plane, they wouldn't even be let on as a passenger anymore ever. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Saleh@feddit.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. We could design road-networks in a way that makes speeding more difficult and enact stricter speed limits. Whenever these measures are taking in an area they greatly reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. I wish. And who's going to tell all those people that they are not going to drive again, ever? In pilot training, even showing signs of bravado or machismo is grounds for getting failed. The problem is that if you do that those people will go and vote you out, especially in this climate. One of the main campaign promises of the idiot who got the most votes in the last Dutch election was to put the speed limits back to 130 kmh from the reduced 100 kmh on motorways. People like to be dumb. BTW it would take minimal effort to enforce highway speed limits with cameras checking entry and exit times and distances. In some places with road tolls, it wouldn't even need any more data collection. A single SQL query would return all those people doing 100 kmh over on the motorways. Wonder why outside of a few outliers, nobody does it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vala@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago This would make people so mad though. permalink fedilink source parent [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 32 points 1 year ago (2 children) IDK about trains, but the problem with cars is that we let people operate them with minimal training and practically no oversight. You see shit on roads daily where if the driver was flying a plane, they wouldn't even be let on as a passenger anymore ever. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Saleh@feddit.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. We could design road-networks in a way that makes speeding more difficult and enact stricter speed limits. Whenever these measures are taking in an area they greatly reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. I wish. And who's going to tell all those people that they are not going to drive again, ever? In pilot training, even showing signs of bravado or machismo is grounds for getting failed. The problem is that if you do that those people will go and vote you out, especially in this climate. One of the main campaign promises of the idiot who got the most votes in the last Dutch election was to put the speed limits back to 130 kmh from the reduced 100 kmh on motorways. People like to be dumb. BTW it would take minimal effort to enforce highway speed limits with cameras checking entry and exit times and distances. In some places with road tolls, it wouldn't even need any more data collection. A single SQL query would return all those people doing 100 kmh over on the motorways. Wonder why outside of a few outliers, nobody does it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vala@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago This would make people so mad though. permalink fedilink source parent [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Saleh@feddit.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. We could design road-networks in a way that makes speeding more difficult and enact stricter speed limits. Whenever these measures are taking in an area they greatly reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. I wish. And who's going to tell all those people that they are not going to drive again, ever? In pilot training, even showing signs of bravado or machismo is grounds for getting failed. The problem is that if you do that those people will go and vote you out, especially in this climate. One of the main campaign promises of the idiot who got the most votes in the last Dutch election was to put the speed limits back to 130 kmh from the reduced 100 kmh on motorways. People like to be dumb. BTW it would take minimal effort to enforce highway speed limits with cameras checking entry and exit times and distances. In some places with road tolls, it wouldn't even need any more data collection. A single SQL query would return all those people doing 100 kmh over on the motorways. Wonder why outside of a few outliers, nobody does it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vala@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago This would make people so mad though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children) We could increase the training requirements and oversight. I wish. And who's going to tell all those people that they are not going to drive again, ever? In pilot training, even showing signs of bravado or machismo is grounds for getting failed. The problem is that if you do that those people will go and vote you out, especially in this climate. One of the main campaign promises of the idiot who got the most votes in the last Dutch election was to put the speed limits back to 130 kmh from the reduced 100 kmh on motorways. People like to be dumb. BTW it would take minimal effort to enforce highway speed limits with cameras checking entry and exit times and distances. In some places with road tolls, it wouldn't even need any more data collection. A single SQL query would return all those people doing 100 kmh over on the motorways. Wonder why outside of a few outliers, nobody does it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) people don't like wasting time in traffic and will happily take a slightly higher death rate to get it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago We are not talking about the inherent danger of driving, but the danger caused by people either physically or psychologically unfit to drive. The problem is not highways with speed limits of 130 kmh, but the people driving 240 on them, or the people driving drunk, running red lights, etc. And as SUV sales show, most people are not comfortable with higher death rates for themselves, but are okay with endangering others. Ironically though, SUVs are more dangerous for their drivers as well, so apparently people are going for a perception of safety rather than actual safety even for themselves. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vala@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago This would make people so mad though. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] owl@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago I don't think loosening regulations in one place will help in other places. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) And if we are making rules about exiting a plane it should apply to when the plane lands normally. There is absolutely no reason it takes 30+ mints to get the fuck off the plane once we've arrived at the gate permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friendlymessage@feddit.org 5 points 1 year ago* That would mean getting rid of carry-on and deploying emergency chutes every time which costs 10s of thousands to replace each time and grounds the plane for weeks. Makes sense. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] friendlymessage@feddit.org 5 points 1 year ago* That would mean getting rid of carry-on and deploying emergency chutes every time which costs 10s of thousands to replace each time and grounds the plane for weeks. Makes sense. permalink fedilink source parent
