Computerized Navigation Systems to the Rescue

Rhys_Lewis writes "There is an article in Newsweek discussing the advantages of traffic avoidance systems in big cities around the world. I can't help thinking that it would be cheaper to subsidise in-car satnav units with traffic avoidance than building new freeways. Surely it makes sense to interactively route traffic than to keep building passive roads?"

Comments

Stop traffic now

[Rajesh Gupta]

Use mass transit.

Re:Stop traffic now

[isorox]

You wouldn't say that if you lived in London. Every day people are treated worse then cattle by being cramed into overflowing delayed expensive trains.

The report published on Wednesday found that people using public transport faced a "daily trauma" and were forced to travel in "intolerable conditions".

Increase the number of people on mass transit and you get more accidents.

Re:Just get out of your car!

[Anonymous Coward]

Working for a trucking industry, I can say that traffic costs my company millions of dollars a year, from wasted fuel to extra wages, to additional maintenance on the equipment. A good traffic avoidance system would remove some of these costs, and if it were widely adopted in commercial industries, would have the after-effect of making it a moot point for the average commuter to have.
Aside from the reduction of traffic jams, the incidental costs to the everyday joe would be immense, and they wouldn't even have to purchase one.

Classic El Farol Problem

[Montgomery Burns III]

Isn't this a variation of a classic El Farol Problem?.

Thanks to slashdot User urbazewski.
My understanding would lead me to believe that a fully informed public would not neccesarily yield less congestion.