Those are very valid points, I was more teasing on the two parent posts inferring that somehow America was technically behind and that speed was the primary objective factor.
For sure the Chinese train system has outpaced the American train system in speed, but I am not sold on high speed rail being a better solution than air.
However, I will assert that the American values of living in a suburb with a patch of grass, and being able to go where you want when you want without someone playing their phone too loud in the train car, has driven the travel arrangement in a different direction.

Sinking billions into a high speed rail line that is then inflexible and costly to maintain is a hard ask.
From my view it is simply security theater that is primary limiting factor for total air travel time vs high speed rail travel time.

Even after September 11th up until the Dallas Love Field remodel, I could show up to the airport as late as 20 minutes before take off and make my flight.
There was a side security entrance that the pilots and flight attendance used that was not advertised to the public, but they never stopped me from using it.
I had to do the regular shoes off naked x-ray while the staff flashed a badge, but no lines, and I had no belt and no shoe laces.
My carry on was good for 5 days of clothing, so no checking anything.
No extra fees for my carry on either.
On the St. Louis side the Southwest airlines had its own terminal and I had pretty much no wait.
I also made a point to travel on Saturday afternoon/evenings, and Wednesday/Tuesday evenings to avoid the heavier travel days.
My pointing being I have experienced what ideally air travel could be without the security mess and baggage concerns.

Generally I would assume on one end in an American city you are not going to the downtown.
One because most people live in the suburbs outside the city center and airports are more accessible outside the city center.
But on the other side the city center may be the target, and a high speed rail in the city center could be a time advantage.
However that advantage would be lost when having to travel to the city center to depart since the city center is more congested and harder to park in then an outlying airport.

A high speed rail from Dallas to St. Louis would still have been competitive, about 3.5 hours vs 2 hours for the flight with taxing.
However, the cost to put in a high speed rail from Dallas to St. Louis would be in the billions and way less flexible than air travel.

What I would hope for in American travel in the near future is tailored options for the varying distances:
Commercial flights with reduced security theater for the 500 mile or more trips, with supersonic jets back in the mix for those 1000 mile or more trips.
More regional airports and private airports in the mix for the 200 to 500 mile trips, reducing traffic in and out of the airport by air and ground; and a ride sharing like program for private jets that would make private air travel a more affordable option.
For the sub 200 mile trips I would love an Autobahn influence, some fast lanes with 100 to 125 mph or more, and perhaps a self driving lane that could push 180 mph.
Put that billions for high speed tracks into better engineered roads, maybe some safety verification your vehicle can hit the speed safely, and the other half for more regional airlines and streamlining air security and boarding.

I enjoy ride sharing, taxis, and self driving cars for solving the last mile issues as well.
Really it seems perhaps for anything under 200 miles the American push will be better roads and autonomous vehicles flying around: figuratively in that they could hit 200 mph on a nice stretch of well engineered highway, or literally as we get multirotor vertical take of and landing vehicles in the mix.

My grandpa rode on a passenger airplane from LA and to New York in the 1960s at Mach 0.85 (900 km/h, 550 mph). I rode in my brother's Cirrus SR22T from Dallas to Denver at 200mph (320 kp/h) in 2015. I am sure people would use high speed rail in the US. But if I am taking a little 100 mile drive I would rather leave when I want to leave, not be restricted by someone else's set schedule, not wait at some train station, not share a vehicle with strangers, and have my own car to get around in the other city. I see no bureaucracy issue in the US either, people can afford better options and prefer convenience and freedom over public transpiration if they can afford it.

The two other responses also attempted to assert that my so called intellectual "property" is worth less than other intellectual "property"; and therefore that is why it is not very meaningful for me to push for abolishing Copyright, Patents, and Trade Secrets based on the golden rule. But I think your response highlights the problem with this counter argument the most, is the most concise, and most importantly your other contributions in this discussion entice me to solicit more from you.

Your response seems to invoke perhaps three logical fallacies:
Straw Man Fallacy by reframing the argument as a "useless shit" versus "valuable shit." instead of the nature and value of intellectual property.
False Dichotomy by creating a binary choice between their possessions are valuable, or mine are worthless; oversimplifying the complexity of intellectual property and the various ways it can be valued or perceived.
Ad Hominem, by of course just attacking my shit being useless.

But I seem to have unintentionally opened myself up more to that attack by offering that I am fine with giving up Copyright, Patents, and Trade Secrets protections for myself in an attempt to primitively counter this line of argument that really does not get to the heart of what I want to see discussed.

In exchange for a paycheck I have created patents and copyrightable material, but gave those rights away immediately to my previous employer who turned those into more profit than my paycheck. That was the agreement, and I am proud of the contributions; but I did not really see it as me giving up intellectual property but instead being compensated for my labor by a pre-established agreement. All that is to say, my shit is not useless damn it! But even if you agreed what I have produced is more valuable than all the advances humanity has made before me, and therefore I am the sole person in the position to be altruistic with so called intellectual "property" I do not think that really supports my position, or really matters.

I value the work of others. There are artists and inventors and investors and so on that I am glad created their products, and I am happy to compensate them for their work. I can enjoy most all the movies, television shows, music, books, software I want without paying for it through various ways that would be at minimum gray areas with intellectually property laws if not outright violating them. The laws do not need to be changed for me to enjoy the fruits of humanity mostly for free, or without compensating the original creators. But thankfully I am blessed enough to be able to afford what is demanded for those luxuries, and I want to give my money to those creators so they hopefully make more of what I like.

However, I selfishly worry that the restrictions in place due to so called Intellectual "Property" do not promote progress near as much as the removal of the restrictions would. I understand that people need to eat and cloth themselves, but more than that the things they produce that I enjoy require money to produce. This is not about a free lunch or communism or something. It is about freedom.

I enjoyed the early Star Wars movies for example, and it is crime against humanity that Disney has a monopoly on producing Star Wars movies. Although I am not sure why someone cannot produce a fantasy movie in space with super powered good and bad guys with plasma blades called "Heavenly Body Battle" and compete I guess? I would pay to see that...

The two responses before you both attempted to assert that my so called intellectual "property" is worth less than other intellectual "property"; and therefore that is why it is not very meaningful for me to push for abolishing Copyright, Patents, and Trade Secrets based on the golden rule. I think there is an interesting discussion to be had there.

However, you had an interesting analogy that on the surface illustrates the repeated response point of my so called intellectual "property" not being as valuable as others, but also ignores another, perhaps more subtle, point and value that I do not equate so called intellectual "property" to be property. I would like to take up that discussion with you, and assume you believe so called intellectual "property" is in some way equivalent to physical property.

No I would not give up property rights, even to my humble old Jeep Wrangler and 1400 square foot 1941 built two bedroom house in order to gain access to any Lamborghini and New York City penthouse I might want to explore. I believe property rights are intrinsic and so called intellectual "property" is not property.

I found it interesting how the US Constitution framed Copyright in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8: "promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
To me this clause confesses that so called intellectual "property" is not an intrinsic right, but an artificial one extended by the US Constitution to promote the progress of science and useful arts. I am not convinced that in any fashion Copyright, Patents, nor Trade Secrets promote the progress of science and useful arts; and therefore are not covered by this clause.

I will offer up the two largest industries: food and clothing. Both are not afforded so called intellectual "property" rights; yet are in the largest industries in the world. Yes, everyone needs to eat, and most people need clothing; however no one needs to eat a $100 steak while wearing a $1000 suit. In both industries, Trademarks are extremely important for that $100 steak and $1000 suit to command those prices; because you want to know that chef X prepared the steak and designer Y made the suit.

I am not a big fan of so called Intellectual "Property".
Copyright, Patents, and Trade Secret ranking pretty low on my list.
I am willing to give up my claims to Copyright, Patents, and Trade Secret in exchange for ignoring anyone else's claims.
However, I like Trademark going both ways, and is the the only valuable Intellectual Property I respect.
I want to know who created what part of something, and I like credit for something I got out first.
I want the opportunity to reward the creator if I want, and to be able to identify more content from them; and in turn want to provide people the opportunity to award me accordingly if they desire.

So I would want knock-off Emily Portman to be allowed to produce "Not Emily Portman" music, but I want to know. Then I can decide to give to Emily Portman or the knock-off accordingly in the hope that it will support them creating more of what I like.

Words get their meaning from use, not your fancy book Mr. Webster. 'The Internet is down' has always meant 'our local connection is down.' It never implied a global blackout! If I am not connected, then for me, the Internet is definitely not fine.

I have been using Feedly since Google retired Reader. I have run into a limit on tags and I am still terrified of Feedly going away. What self hosted solutions have you been looking at? Anything to recommend?

Actually pretty much hate Apple for the closed garden stuff, and avoid giving them money, recommend to everyone try and go Android and Linux or Windows at least because you are more free there. But do have to give them credit where credit is due. Mostly cannot stand their operating systems, Windows 95 still has a better user interface over Mac OS, and Android is a clear winner making iOS look like a toy for babies. But damn their silicone is shiny, and those camera optics are hard to ignore, and the Vision Pro has no competition. If you want Apple to change, stop rewarding them with your money. They are not price gouging, people are throwing money at them.

Apple market cap is third only to nVidia and Microsoft I believe at around $3 trillion.
The EU-27 brought in about $9 trillion, the US around $5 trillion, to Apple's $391 billion.
No Apple is not a little guy, but they are being extorted, the EU and the US will show up with guns, everything is backed with force and fear as you have illustrated with

Open platforms are a positive thing. It would be awesome if Apple threw the walled garden gates wide open.
But trying to teardown the walls is immoral, and ultimately going to have negative consequences for all.
The government is about the worse solution for everything, a necessary evil at best.
Go build an open platform, plant the seed with open RISC-V hardware, harvest running Linux, and bake with an open source git repo patreon kick starter app store! I would buy that bread, but if you forced Apple to do it you will never be free!

The good and services at Whole Foods are no unreasonable or unfair, nor are we in a time of emergency or disaster. There is a Kroger down the street one way and a Tom Thumb the other way, and an HEB next door, and Walmart and Target grocery somewhere if you do not want to give Bezos your money. People chose to go to Whole Foods and pay more.

So little developer you can now open his own app store, or throw his app in the Epic App Store? Yeah right, no one even wants the Epic App store on their phone. You can have all kinds of stupid App Stores on your Android phone, no one wants them. And they will all take their cut from your app. Epic is doing you no favors you sucker, they got you tricked.

Yes, Apple is an excellent investment. Produces fantastic hardware pushing technology forward in a valuable way, and produces a return for their investors. On the other hand Epic is a pretty much a drain on society producing no advancement in technology, and frivolous lawsuits clogging up our legal system.

Yes, Epic is hurting both the customer and the other developers by throwing money to lawyers only to produce a worse situation.
Let us look at Apple's response in the EU to being forced to allow sideloading, now you (as a developer) have to pay a Core Technology Fee: https://developer.apple.com/su...

There is no free lunch. Using extortion and bullying to get what you want is at best a short term gain.
Go develop for an open ecosystem and stop giving Apple, Samsung, and Google your developer money!

Yes, yes, I have been waiting for you to snort something. See, you are the fat little short sighted pig in the book. Let us start out by pointing out your objectively verified lie:

All three companies have significantly advanced the compute power and the camera quality in their devices over the last five years; creating better and better devices. They are for sure using profits to fund these developments. I would much rather the money go to these three companies than Epic any day. What has Epic produced worth anything to me...okay I enjoyed Robo Recall it was fun. But I much rather have 8K60 camera and screen with the compute to run local LLMs, and Epic is not working on that...but damn sure Samsung, Google, and Apple will deliver those specs in the next few years.

Next lie:

No, no little piggy, YOU and your piglets are padding their bank account, because you love their bread! All you little piggies keep throwing money at them and snorting like they owe you something more. If they are not giving you the open eco system you "deserve" then stop throwing money at them! There are alternatives...but the bread is just not as tasty to you; because you are not willing to work and support a company that will actually give you what you claim to want. Nope you want your bread, and you want to eat it too. Sorry, it just does not work that way, you either put in the work, or you pay; extortion is a short term victory.

Epic is not doing you any service. If they win Apple, Google, and Samsung will just get their developer fee another way; a way that may be worse for other developers. You will pay the same amount you pay today for that Epic jam to spread all over your bread and stuff your fat face.

Epic needs to stop suing to piggy back free on the work of others. Apple, Google, and Samsung invest a lot into building great hardware, and their app stores are funding this advancement. I had a book growing up, "Little Red Hen", the other farm animals did not help the Little Red Hen plant, harvest, mill, or bake the bread, so they did not get to eat it. Epic is trying to bring some jam for the bread, and "Little Red Hen" says everyone else pays me 30% of their profits so I will sell their jam next to my bread. The Little Red Hens put a lot of work into building great hardware, and Epic wants to sell its jam without paying the gate keepers; jam can now be created by some LLM prompts silly Epic. Maybe I just hate litigious people...

Epic needs to go build their own Epic Smartphone. They have plenty of money, some Chinese company can slap a Epic logo on the box and the boot screen along with preloading the Epic Store and they are good to go. I rewarded Valve by buying a Steam Deck, and even threw Zuck a few bucks for doing well on the Quest setup. I can side load on both devices which is great.

I guess I do not know what you are talking about, but to my defense you seem to make fairly hyperbolic assertions.
I assumed that "You know he's put the private data of the whole wold into elasticsearch." referred to Palantir Technologies.
I am eager to be pointed to more information on Mr. Thiel, now that you have brought him to my attention.

As for Mr. Thiel keeping a low profile, it seems you may be being sarcastic there given even before reading your response today a New York Time's interview with Peter Theil was released Friday.

I confess a week ago I maybe could have told you the name was familiar, that he has something to do with silicon valley tech; but I certainly could not have told you with any confidence that he was a co-founder of PayPal, early investor Facebook, and is behind the company Palantir Technologies that has been getting some controversial press lately. Peter Thiel was just not a name I paid attention to.

I just sat through the hour long Peter Theil interview conducted by Ross Douthat of the New York Times.
Thiel does present as a bit odd, but I do not think he is literally a bloodsucking ghoul; or at least he restrained himself from feeding on Mr. Douthat for an hour.

Googling "GE Bankruptcy" returns the exact opposite results.
While there are assertions that GE is on the decline, they have not filed for bankruptcy; but have split into three independent companies.
I am happy to concede Jack Welsh contributed to GE's decline, although I could not assert it with any confidence; nor can I back your claim that GE was destroyed or went through bankruptcy.
It does not defeat your claim Jack Welsh was some horrible person and GE would have been better under another CEO; but so far your presentation weakens any belief I may have been inclined to have in that narrative.

I did not know who boz was, I assume you are referring to Andrew "Boz" Bosworth, Meta's CTO.
It appears Boz did make statements, perhaps behind closed doors, that can be interrupted that way.
I would tend to agree, Facebook (now Meta) seems to be in decline; their growth is non sustainable without Meta Horizon Worlds and their XR hardware taking off.
I would assert though that whatever company nails the smart glasses wearable with the heads up display and integrated AI will have a few customers...

I hope Myspace Tom is off enjoying life somewhere, it does seem he was smart to get out before Myspace became worthless.
However, I would much rather be playing with XR tech and AI potentially influencing future tech as Zuckerberg seems to be able to do, rather than travelling and taking photos as Yahoo Finance asserts Tom Anderson does today.

I have never heard anyone make Zuckerberg a hero; he seems to always be dressed up as the evil villain; and we are all his helpless victims.
In fact the headline this morning about Meta apps accessing photos from your phone you have never published reinforces my decade old policy to never ever install Facebook or Meta software on a device with my personal information.
But hey, I am guilty. I love my Meta Quest 3, nothing else competes in price and features and ease of use; again come on Valve with the Deckard!
Furthermore, selling old stuff online is no longer a Craigslist posting, but has become a Facebook Marketplace posting; I tried to ignore that, but it works.
Unfortunately the decent folks have not stuck around and created the decentralized privacy respecting tools to support the social network we all should want; leaving a void filled with Meta, Tiktok, Twitter...
It seems it should be doable, and profitable, maybe not billion or trillion dollar profitable, but perhaps at least no easy; or maybe Zuckerberg and Thiel's goons show up, suck your blood, or simply offer you enough money to walk away and be happy rather than do good.
At least it must not be easy, otherwise someone would do it.

I agree, trying to thumb through Facebook to see what friends are doing has long been a hassle no worth attempting; now clogged with AI generated garbage; probably not the way to maintain their kingdom.

Because Facebook pretty much ran MySpace and Friendster out of business.
Not even Google managed to compete with Google Buzz or Google+.
Today LinkedIn, Snapchat, Twitter, and Tiktok combined still do not appear to beat Meta (Facebook, Instagram, Threads combined) in market cap, user base, or revenue.

What I take away from that, is I am not going to ignore what Zuckerberg releases or acquires tomorrow; because either he or his puppet masters have some skill at this business stuff.
They produce things that people use; that is saying something.
If Facebook, Instagram, and Threads went offline tomorrow I would probably not notice for a week, or until I read it on Slashdot, and I would not shed a tear.
I would hope they opened the Quest 3 like they did the Oculus Go before the Quest servers went dark though...

If they were senile and truly unable to make the decision in their right mind and you exploited this; then it seems there is not much to hand to you, you snatched a purse from an old helpless lady but on a grander scale.

I confess I did not know who Jack Welsh was before today, nor would I have guess the legendary US corporation was GE.
A quick bit of searching shows Jack took GE from a $12 billion market cap to over $400 billion from 1981 to 2001.
People apparently did not care for his management style and short term focus.
To assert GE was destroyed and that it was only a quick buck seems disingenuous; but I will leave it to you to cite some sources for your assertion there.
I would have pointed to your namesake Compaq, that company has been destroyed.

I am a big fan of PayPal, still use it now when I am buying something online not from Amazon.
I suspect Peter's wealth comes primarily from PayPal and an early investment in Facebook.
I have only recently heard about Palantir which I am suspect your quote is referring to.
If he can get ahold of the data it unfortunately is not private, but perhaps should be.
Just like Facebook, the issue is not someone collecting so called "private" data, the issue is people giving away their private data.
Cannot really blame Peter for making a business gathering it up.

I got tired of being an angry little victim, hating on successful people because they played the game better.
I think that mentality is poison, and spreading the lie that Zuck or others are so evil and we are victims makes things worse, not better.
Because people do not own up that if tomorrow every one signed out of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Threads, and Quest today, Meta would shrivel up.
But they will not, because people love using those products, and no one has given them a better alternative.

You are right! I enjoyed Jaws, and I like sharks.
I enjoyed the Terminator, and I am obsessed with killer AI robots.
But my favorite was Titanic, and I cannot live without ice.

I like to think that the Social Network was a very entertaining documentary.
I do admit I respect the Winklevoss twins, they are not one trick ponies either with Gemini doing well.
Maybe the movie was all villains...