Slashdot Mirror


IBM Patents Pricing Motorists Off Highways

theodp writes "Self-professed patent reformer IBM snagged a patent Tuesday for the Variable Rate Toll System, which covers the rather anti-egalitarian scheme of pricing motorists off of the roads by raising tolls as congestion increases. 'Congestion pricing of traffic is emerging as a completely new services market for IBM,' boasted Jamie Houghton, IBM's Global Leader for Road Charging."

5 of 805 comments (clear)

  1. Tone of the summary by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The tone of the summary is pretty snotty.

    When demand outstrips supply, you have 3 choices:
    1. Endure lines (traffic jams). This sucks for the environment and our dependence on oil, makes the roads less useful for everyone, and costs society a bundle in lost productivity.
    2. Create more supply. Build more roads. We've been trying that for a long, long time. I don't think the Jersey Turnpike can get much bigger.
    3. Curtail demand. Many ways to do this, including building more public transit and taxing fuel.
    4. Raise prices. This affects the poor more than the rich - big surprise there! So does everything else, why are roads special?
    Now, I understand the appeal of helping out the poor. But this isn't health insurance or food stamps or housing. The "right to drive a car to work" is not exactly a basic human right. I think that a nice balance of 2-3 is the way to go.
    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  2. Bad Ideas all around by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about using taxes to pay for roads because they are part of the public infrastructure?!

    Using the PA turnpike as an example, almost all of the tolls go to pay for the state employees and their benefits, heated booths, etc, and very little if any goes back into the road. The toll system is in place to pay for itself and not the road. It's a sham. If they got rid of all the zombies in the toll booths and put up those buckets that you toss change into they could charge a fraction and have more money to put toward the road, but still... that's what taxes are for.

    As a result the PA turnpike is the worst highway in PA to drive on, full of potholes, poorly maintained, half finished construction sitting empty and idle most of the time.

    The other huge reason toll roads are a BAD IDEA is that there is no competition, no other option. There's almost never a parallel highway going the same place, and who would really want that anyway. So you have to pay the toll or not go at all, or spend hours and gas $$ going around. It's taking a critical public resource and using it for legal extortion. Imagine if you had to pay a sidewalk toll to walk to lunch every day.

    This idea of congestion tolls seems to have yet another bad idea behind it... Most people aren't on the roads for fun. They're on the roads because they need to get somewhere.
    If skyrocketing gas prices aren't thinning out the traffic why would congestion tolls thin it out?

    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
  3. Re:Great, another way to screw the tax payers... by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Incorrect. The people without money, and also the sensible people, will start taking public transportation.

    Depends on where you live. There are large cities in the USA that have very poor public transportation. At a former job one of my co-workers was a "flower child" from the 60s and although she had a car, she usually took public transportation to our office. I'd say she could have driven to work in 30-40 minutes most days and driven home in roughly the same time frame. Riding the bus took between 90 minutes and 2 hours each way. While it's certainly cheaper to ride the bus, most rational people would conclude that saving 50-90 minutes each way by driving instead of riding the bus made a lot more sense.

  4. Re:Screw carpools by saider · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, if there was someone else that need to go EXACTLY where I
    want to go, EXACTLY when I want to go there and then also come
    back at EXACTLY the same time, then more likely than not there
    would be a mass transit option available for the same route.


    Self-centered thought will lead nowhere.

    1) You won't carpool because you want an absolute minimum commute time.
    2) Property developers spread out industry and residence because they want the absolute maximum profit.

    #1 leads to no demand for more cooperative arrangements (high density development with good mass transit) which encourages #2.

    We will perpetuate this cycle until we start thinking about the overall best way to do things, instead of the individual best way to do things.

    --


    Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  5. False Dichotomy by EgoWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have to admit, I find it fascinating that in the discussion of an article on a technology that applies a variable solution to a variable problem, the naysayers all waffle between two points; all or nothing.

    You're absolutely right, sometimes carpooling is inefficient. Sometimes it will only work if you go it alone. But you fail to ask the question, "How often can I get away with it?" Are you and your buddies so inflexible that you can't communicate about what would be a good compromise time for leaving? Surely they have end-of-the-day tasks, too? And maybe, just maybe you can put in the extra effort to not have to stay late?

    My point is that generally speaking you could, if you put an ounce of effort into it, find a workable carpool solution. Lots of people do, who recognize that resources aren't infinite - their's or the world's. And if everyone carpooled even 20% of the time that they commute, that's a big difference - a 10% decrease in cars on the road. So why is it that it's such an impossible thing? Is it really that un-doable, or does it just necessitate a change and the acceptance that to-date you haven't been doing it the optimal way?

    --

    [Ego]out