Slashdot Mirror
Stoplights to Mete Out Punishment?
gilrain writes "The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that traffic engineers have created a stoplight that deals with speeding. According to the article, 'It senses when a speeder is approaching and metes out swift punishment. It doesn't write a ticket. It immediately turns from green to yellow to red.' This is not just a prototype: it is in use now at an intersection in the Bay Area. Does stopping speeders before others serve a purpose other than petty revenge? Is it even safe to change expected stoplight patterns, especially for drivers in a hurry?"
That's good, instead of speeding, now they can speed *and* run a red light. I hope it's timed so that the light is far enough away that they have time to stop, and not run through it.
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
It would certainly piss me off if some guy was speeding ahead of me and caused the light ahead of us to turn red, stopping both of us. People on the road get mad at other drivers too often already; do we really need to give people another excuse to get mad at someone, blaming "that idiot speeder" for making them late?
I'd rather be lucky than good.
Speeding is a habit, and another related habit is that of running red lights quickly after a yellow (ie, its yellow when they see it, so it MUST be yellow when they go through it.) I've seen quite a few near misses because of people burning through a sudden red becuase they'd rather not have to slow down.
Well, y'know, there's that whole enforcement of the law thing. Unless that falls under 'petty revenge' in your book. One might also imagine that it'd be effective in encouraging the typical driver to actually obey posted speed limits (though I can't speak for the asshats who'll take it upon themselves to try and 'beat the system' by speeding faster or running the light.)
Is it even safe to change expected stoplight patterns, especially for drivers in a hurry?
Oh, heaven forfend that drivers be expected to pay attention to the road and traffic signals, especially so when they're in a hurry and thus simply have no choice but to violate traffic laws! Gee, officer, I just wasn't expecting that kid to cross the road--and I was in a hurry, so you can hardly blame me for it!
Just because it's easy to get away with speeding doesn't mean it's legal. Just because you're busy, late, or otherwise incapable of managing your life and time in a reasonable fashion doesn't mean that it's somehow more okay for you to speed than somebody who speeds for the hell of it. The fact that you can manufacture any number of scenarios detailing How This Can Go Wrong doesn't change the fact that the person triggering the system is violating traffic laws in the first place. Try following traffic laws. Seriously. You'd be amazed at how well the universe keeps from collapsing on itself when one follows the speed limit, signals lane changes, and maintains adequate braking distance.
On a side note, these aren't all that new--they have 'em in Alexandria, VA, and Bethesda has something similar (warning lights flash at you if you're going too fast.)
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
most people speed... but most people obey the traffic signals as well.
if the traffic signals stop rewarding speeders by making them miss a light, then the speeders will slow down.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
The point is that they believe the risks involved in changing the light are outweighed by the potential that it will cause mass reform in regards to speeding. They think that this will save more accidents and lives by slowing everyone down.
I think this is poposterous. Not only will it not slow people down other than while approaching lights they've remembered do this, just to speed through even faster when they get close enough to get away with it. It's been proven by scientific studies that people are more likely to speed due to a stopsign or stoplight because the subconciously feel the need to make up for lost time.
There are far too many risks to just implement this willy-nilly. The parent brings up a good point with timing, how can you be sure you won't cause an accident by going red so quickly that they can't stop? People are not going to be prepared for this behavior, it's likely to cause mass confusion and accidents during it's implementation.
I'd rather see automated ticket-writing machines than this... as much as I'm against automated ticket-writing.
Jamon
I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
Not to defend unsafe driving, but the reason that nearly everyone speeds is that many speed limits are set so such a low common denominator that you'd assume that brain-damaged chimpanzees were used as the baseline cases. Most people will drive a reasonable speed regardless of what's posted. There are always a few idiots that will drive at insane speeds regardless of what's posted.
The reason that they do this is that they're addicted to traffic ticket revenue, which is essentially a randomly-enforced "tax lottery" - especially in my area where average highway traffic moves at 80 MPH+ (I've been "going with the flow" along with two dozen other drivers at 95+ in the city). I'm just waiting for them to pair this up with red-light cameras and 2-second yellow lights for the ultimate in revenue generation...
Yes, this sounds cynical (and it is), but if these jackasses were really interested in little things like public safety then they'd probably put some actual effort into designing safe intersections, traffic interchanges, force land developers to plan traffic flow, setting speed limits that are reasonable, etc.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
And the documentation you mention would be...
Dr. Rick
- "It's such a fine line between clever and stupid" (Nigel Tufnel)
- Zort! (Pinky)
it is a behavioral punishment.
if you always get a negative reinforcement for an action, operant conditioning will cause the drivers to slow down. tickets and cops are not regular enough to train people to stop.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Except that:
In other words, it's fixing a problem that doesn't exist and is only meant to make people feel better.
People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
As long as it goes through the yellow cycle as well, how is this much different from a normal red light?
You're coming up to the intersection, the light changes, either because the cycle changes, or because a speeder has triggered it. br>
In neither case does the speeder (or anyone else) know where the signal is in its cycle.
So it changes as he approaches. Big deal.
without-warning red light
if you RTFA, it specifically says there is a yellow pahse before the red.
Unfortunately, there have been studies that show that drivers will drive at what they consider a safe speed regardless of the speed limit. Tickets are less of a deterrent and more of a revenue source for underfunded municipalities. Check out http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html (although you always have to consider the source in any study).
That is exactly why I envision this working. It is Pavlovian-esque, subliminal, always present, and there is a direct link between action and consequence.
Normally when you speed nothing bad happens. You don't generally get stopped, you don't generally get a ticket. With a single punishment for every 300 times you do something, there is a disconnect.
With the light trick it happens every time. By trying to go faster you are forced to wait out the light so you get where you are going later than you would have had you driven the speed limit. Every time. Which sucks. So you learn. Fast.
People slow down in town without those pesky (and expensive) tickets, cops are free to go do real police work catching bad guys, damn - I think this is brilliant. Sure beats getting a $100 photo-radar ticket in the mail.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
tickets and cops are not regular enough to train people to stop.
It doesn't matter. This will go over like a lead baloon. Cops don't want people to slow down. How would they raise revenue? If cops really wanted to stop speeders, all they have to do is drive one marked police car though the area at the posted speed limit. No one will pass them. Instead, they hide in alleys and behind bushes waiting to jump out and fine people. Isn't it obvious what their real motivation is?
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
but can we define speeding?
While speed limits make sense in many situations, they don't always.
There are plenty of places that I can point to where speed limits are entirely too low. That is to say it is perfectly safe given normal driving conditions (no fog, dry or even slightly wet roads) to go 15-20 MPH over the posted speed limit.
This is both in town and out. In fact, I can say from my own experience, as someone who regularly "speeds" that about 95% of the time that I have had a close call with a pedestrian or another car it has not involved speed, but rather has involved crowded intersections where traffic is moving well below posted speed limits where it is needed for the driver to track moving objects in several places.
(Cars in 2 other lanes of trafic, and pedestrians walkin gou tinto the street with abandon etc)
The simple fact is that speed limits are usually sweeping "30 in the city" which are really only needed in certain places within the city. Most wide city roads are no more dangerous at 45 than they are at 30, except when traffic is too heavy to do 45 anyway, in which case it self limits to safe speeds anyway.
All in all I agree this is a fine solution to real speeding... but generally speaking I think that speed limits are set too low for normal conditions and I shudder to think what decreasing the speeds people drive in such a hevay handed and sweeping way will do to traffic around here during the time periods at the ends of rush hour where speeds are starting to naturally pick back up.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"