Comparing Infrastructure Timelines: Surveillance Networks vs. Public Transit
This image presents a map of the United States densely populated with markers, juxtaposed with a caption that contrasts the rapid deployment of surveillance technology with the lengthy development process for public rail infrastructure. The text highlights a perceived disparity in how quickly private or government entities can install widespread camera networks and data centers compared to the multi-decade planning and committee approval processes often associated with building modern train systems. The visual serves as a commentary on societal priorities, infrastructure investment, and the speed at which surveillance technology is integrated into the urban landscape.
the major difference here is that trains are not immediately profitable and are inherently intended to be reliable.
Yet Another reason not to visit the us.. one of the many already
OP is dumb, these aren’t comparable
Its politics and money anyone could tell you that.
Comparing apples with oranges
You can't compare the two, trains need a lot of infrastructure. Towns were built to support it, flock cameras just have to be installed on a already existing light post
Tear em down!!
Hmm its almost as if one is stationary and the other is regulated mass transit with human safety concerns in mind How bizarre.
Building one costs a fraction of what building the other coats. And let us not forget building a big and modern rail system requires enormous engineering challenges which, in case of mistakes, can cost more millions in money or even hundreds of human lives. Which again af course
Trains help people. Flock cameras/data centers could help control them in a techno fascist feudal type of society which would enshrine the wealthiest as lords. Factor in profitability (hint, huge debt for trains to start with, little to no immediate profits). Guess what the choic