Slashdot Mirror
Rude Drivers Reduce Traffic Jams
BuzzSkyline writes "Traffic jams are minimized if a significant fraction of drivers break the rules by doing things like passing on the wrong side or changing lanes too close to an intersection. The insight comes from a cellular automata study published this month in the journal Physical Review E. In effect, people who disregard the rules help to break up the groups that form as rule-followers clump together. The risk of jamming is lower if all people obey the rules than if they all disobey them, according to the analysis, but jamming risk is lowest when about 40 percent of people drive like jerks."
especially on the Belt Parkway where people seem to slow down to 30mph to go over a bridge
apparently this study didn't take atlanta into consideration..... everyone there drives like jerks.
stephen
Drivers breaking the rules to get out of traffic jams reduces the number of cars in traffic jams.
In other news... passengers jumping out of airplanes leaves more room for other passengers.
Of course rude drivers ease congestion. When they kill someone because of their stupidity, not only will that person not drive again, but they'll probably lose their license, so they won't either!
Soooo ... if I'm blasting people that clump traffic with an airhorn, am I just part of the jerk population that's helping traffic flow or just a jerk?
that we all have to take turns driving like jerks? Some of us aren't slowing down for anybody.
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
A reasonable space must be left between each car to provide enough extra slack to handle unexpected events like braking and slowing. When people follow too closely, this slack is all but eliminated thus causing each unexpected event's effect to become magnified. A quick tap of the brakes causes a chain reaction resulting in a traffic jam. Leaving enough space to handle an unexpected event provides each driver extra time to react.
In addition, since the additional slack allows for longer reaction times, a faster average speed can be achieved. Bob Dobbs would be so proud.
"Breaking the rules" is not rude behavior on the road, as far as I'm concerned. Most of the problems on our highways are caused by people driving 'below' the rules. Some examples are failing to accelerate to highway speed on the onramp, driving in the 'passing' lane when you aren't passing anyone, and my personal least favorite, not being ready to go when the light turns green at a crowded rush hour intersection. If no-one made these key mistakes our highways would probably be able to accomodate 20% more traffic without any physical upgrades in capacity. yet somehow, I'm the bad guy for flashing my lights at some jerk driving 55 right next to someone else going 55 when there are 15 cars stacked up behind him!
Article also says to always obey the 3 second rule. This doesn't make sense. In heavy traffic most folks are 1/2 to one second apart. If you spread them 3 seconds apart, throughput goes down by a factor of between three and six. Too bad, the original research is impressive and spot on.
If this was the case, with most drivers being who they are, then we should never experience any traffic jams. I never understood how people you know who are intelligent, polite, and reasonable, get behind a steering wheel and suddenly become "savages"?
Vindication at last! I can now provide proof to my wife that my driving style has a purpose, and that purpose is for the greater good of mankind.
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
IMO, a lot of problems could be avoided if people respected all the rules of the road, and not just the official ones. For example, I respect anyone's right to drive at whatever speed they feel comfortable with. If that's at, above or below the speed limit I don't care. However, no matter how fast you're going, if there's someone behind you who wishes to go faster, move over to the right. It's not your job to set speed limits, the cops do that, and they exercise discretion too depending on the traffic and time of the day.
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them. It's situations like these that cause problems, as people who wish to go faster try to get around the slowpokes.
In my opinion, if people simply moved over for a faster car, kept the left lane open for passing/faster traffic, then the vast majority of weaving cars and "jerks" on the highways would disappear.
It's a big peeve of mine. I drive faster than the speed limit, I'll admit it. If I'm in the wrong, the cops will pull me over. However, get out of the left lane if you're going slow and there's 10 cars tailgating behind you!
-"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
The risk of jamming is lower if all people obey the rules than if they all disobey them
I beg to differ, compression waves in traffic form even when everyone obeys traffic http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2008/03/shockwave-traff.html
Once in traffic if you drive slowly avoiding the urge to speed up when a gap forms you can actually help everyone behind you have a more pleasant cruise.
Excellent, now what should my novelty license plate say to convey that I am driving like an ass for everyone's benefit?
Tragedy of the commons. Seriously, what's the deal with 'studies' like this even being done?
In any system that requires order, a certain amount of entropy is desirable. But when the factors contributing to this entropy are 'given permission' to increase, then the system breaks down into complete chaos.
Isn't that just great? Now jerkwad drivers can justify themselves quoting this study: "But I was just trying to be the 40% of helpful guys!"
[Slashdot Comments We Liked]
Or people can just stop tailgating
What do these jerks do to the incidence of accidents?
I'd rather continue to wait than significantly increase my chances of being involved in a collision.
(No, I haven't read the article yet.)
obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
I live in Boston, so I have empirical evidence that if 40% people drive like assholes, you still get plenty of traffic jams. Sorry, your model must be broken.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
That's what I'd like to know. This seems like one of those no duh studies where we discover that breaking the rules that everybody else is supposed to follow comes with benefits. What's next a study where we find out that pretending to be a war hero can get people chicks? Or how lying about how you conduct business gets you bailout dollars?
Well, in Germany it would be against the law to change early. It has been shown that driving till the end, and then merging as "one from the left lane, one from the right lane" is the most efficient way to handle ending lanes. Therefore the law demands that. It's called "Reissverschlussverfahren" ("zipper procedure").
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
The first thing that came to mind for me was, "what makes a hardware driver rude?" This is Slashdot, afterall...
/* No Comment */
No, the interesting thing is that the people breaking the rules make the entire situation better for everyone else, too; not just for themselves.
On a related note, my other biggest pet peeve is the slow people who speed up when they see you trying to pass them so that you can't, and then slow down again.
-"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
I have a problem with making assumptions for automobile traffic based on a computer simulation that used pedestrian traffic. For one thing, pedestrians don't have speed limits. If everyone on the road drove 60 miles per hour, there would be no "traffic clumps." It's the variations in speed that cause these. Also, previous studies have shown it's the jerks who force the rule-abiders to hit their breaks unexpectedly, which causes additional clumps in the system, waves of traffic jams that can last hours after a close-call occurs.
i ~ Celebrating Science, Cyberspace, Speculation
This is actually a law in a lot of states. The actual wording varies from "Left lane is for passing only" to "you can be in the left lane but must not impede faster traffic" to "you can be in the left lane, but must be driving at the speed limit and should not impede faster traffic."
As somebody has already mentioned in the comment on PhysicsCentral, a realistic model should take into account the dependence between the probability of causing an accident resulting in a traffic jam and the driving style. I could read only the abstract. If the parameter q is the only parameter used, it is not entirely surprising that they got the results they got. In such a model, the rule-obeying drivers driving in the same direction stick together. Rule non-obedience makes the fluid more compressible. Shock waves in compressible fluids appears at higher velocities. It is surely nice their model agrees with the intuition. I would not call such a simplified model realistic, though.
I find that traffic jams and more accidents are caused by the chain reaction of events because of the assholes that do things like passing on the wrong side or changing lanes too close to an intersection. Add in the dolts that are texting, shaving, putting on makeup, etc and it's even worse. I-83 from PA to Baltimore blows ...
"Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
Normally I don't do this but I was curious. I RTFA and it seems that the studies were all about preventing pooling/jamming. It may be true that by creating disruptions one can reduce jamming but how does that affect the overall traffic flow. I would suspect in a perfect system each car abiding by the rules would have the greatest flow. What is hard to determine is that in the real world what would be the best.
Actually I don't think it really matters. Even if the study shows that driving 65 and leaving 5 second gaps can prevent 50% of traffic jams the social change necessary probably wouldn't happen.
I've found this depends very much on the type of "illegal" behavior. In general, it seems to depend if the type of illegal behavior is sensible or stupid. Passing on the shoulder to make a right turn isn't rude; it's an indication that a turn lane should be present. Passing on the right, while dangerous, helps get around somebody else who was rude (and probably illegal) in parking in the passing lane. Those all make sense.
There's a lot of other behavior that is rude and doesn't help congestion. For instance, in a jam where both lanes are clogged, and you have some asshole who's constantly changing lanes because one looks faster for 10 seconds. He doesn't get anywhere, just slows everything down. Or the people who use the merge lane as a passing lane. They clog up everything by forcing the whole right lane to come to a stop to let them in when the merge ends. Or the "oh, my exit's over there!" people who wait until the last second to change lanes for their turn, invariably forcing everyone else to stop.
You can claim that certain illegal behaviors benefit traffic as a whole, but my guess is that these are a small subset of the many stupid, dangerous, rude, and illegal things that drivers do.
If someone is passing on the wrong side, then someone else already being rude and breaking the rules by refusing to yield the passing lane.
The other day, a person was changing their tire on the shoulder of the road facing the opposite direction (was a 4-lane road, 2 lanes in each direction, separated by a 20 foot or so median) and traffic on my side of the road came to a halt. Once I made it to the front of the line of traffic, in the lane (going the opposite direction) nearest the tire-changer, a car in the lane next to me and slightly ahead of me was gawking at the scene so hard they started drifting HARD into my lane. They were completely mesmerized by someone changing a frigging tire. To the point that they weren't even conscious that they were still driving a car.
I swear I don't get it. I had to blare my horn at them to get them to get back over into their lane, and they had the temerity to flip me off! Luckily for me, I drive a large truck and was able to pull in front of them at the next light where I stopped, put on my hazards, drug them from their car and threw them into traffic. No, of course I didn't. However, it's interesting how rage-filled we people get in traffic. I am trying to get it under control, but cannot abide selfish, stupid unaware drivers. I hate them with a burning passion.
Sent from your iPad.
And this has always been obvious to me. "But officer, by resisting being stuck in the idiot parade, I'm doing my part to help everyone reach their destinations just a bit sooner!"
Caveat Utilitor
While they make the situation better for everybody, the people breaking the rules benefit the most. This is sort of like the "tragedy of the commons," with a twist. In the tragedy of the commons, the people who don't break the rules don't derive any benefit. In this situation, they're at least a little bit better off than if nobody broke the rules. Everybody has an incentive to try to be in that 40%, though. (Some people, like me, follow the rules dogmatically and altruistically.) I guess what's called for is some sort of automagic lottery system by which 40% of drivers in high-traffic situations are notified in real-time that they are being encouraged to drive more aggressively. AI researchers, get on that.
Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
I know I slow down when people tailgate me very badly (within a meter), and speed up again when they change lanes. It's a guilty pleasure.
Honestly, it's the only safe thing to me do. If I have someone driving that close behind me I'll need more time to brake if something happens up ahead, to prevent the person behind me ramming into me.
Give me space, and we'll go a nice fast speed. I'll be happy to let you pass me and will move to the right. Ride my ass and expect to go under the limit.
I wrote a traffic simulaton in college, and it only worked (i.e. didn't jam up) when there was a wide variety of driver behaviours - preferred separaton distance, preferred speed, and slow-down-or-change-lane factor I think were the main attributes that I used. It wasn't sophisticated enough to take laws or highway code into account, but it was just a bunch of Pascal code running on a rickety old Pr1me.
Nothing frustrates me more than incompetence on the road. I deal with it swiftly, and with great justice!
The biggest thing I've noticed since I moved out here is that Californians (the Bay Area, to be specific, I understand LA is another world) have awful lane discipline.
I wish I had a dime for everytime I've been on 101 and there are 4 cars in front of me all going 65 (the limit) with nothing in front of them. Nobody seems to understand that the passing lane is for passing. As a result, you get trapped behind these rolling roadblocks of cars going at or below the limit. This is not only more jam-prone, it's more dangerous. Don't drive side-by-side people! Leave an opening so that other people have a chance to pass, thus getting a longer following distance. Slowing down behind a rolling roadblock isn't practical either, because you have to drop well below the limit and become a hazard yourself. People will just pass you and get stuck behind the same idiots.
It's not rocket science, people: 1. Pull left. 2. Pass. 3. Get right.
This is in stark contrast to my home town: the Washington DC metro area.
On the Beltway, everybody is in a contest to pass the other guy. The thing is a f'n racetrack and it's so dangerous I think the cops are afraid to pull people over; but at least you don't get stuck behind idiots all driving side-by-side. They'd be T-boned off the highway, or some guy in a Porsch would slide between them like slalom skiiing and they'd get the message. I may have been scared a bit more often on the Beltway, but I was never as frustrated.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
In effect, people who disregard the rules help to break up the groups that form as rule-followers clump together.
I understand that breaking the rules would clear up a clump faster than following the rules, but wouldn't this clump form at first due to someone who disregards the rules? Unless someone else can think of a more common reasons a clump might form due to rule-following instead of slow drivers in the passing lane or people slamming on the brakes to avoid someone veering through traffic.
Welcome to Mexico City, where people offer "assertive driving" seminars and workshops
No sig for the moment.
You're not supposed to change lanes within 100 feet of an intersection. There is a chance that another car accelerates into you as they attempt to clear a caution light. Or, one may turn into the lane you're changing into. This is much more likely on two-lane roads.
The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
Just doing my small part to make the world better!
This is what I noticed in the U.S. as well. People would line up very early on a lane merge, to the point where there is an entire empty lane for one mile which could have been used for traffic movement.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
This does not, of course, excuse the reckless driving of the "angered" guy trying to get around the slowpoke.
(but you're right, driving in the "slow lane" when "going slow[ly]" makes sense and helps mitigate people getting angry...)
On the other hand, what about the annoying guys that just whizz past you in the lane you're trying to get over into while you are trying to get OUT of the fast lane? And they sometimes get really upset, because you just moved into HIS LANE and he had to use his brakes. Ugh! Awful brakes.
Seriously. If people just ... lightened up and were in slightly less of a hurry and did not think that the road, highway, lane, etc., belonged to them... and at the same time realized that the hulk of plastic they are sitting in really doesn't protect them a whole lot in the grand scheme of things...
Yes, those people find me suddenly cutting in front of them. Enought with driving in the left lane; its ALSO illegal in many states.
And they don't rubber-neck. They don't break down. They don't get pulled over for speeding tickets,
if I can get out of tickets using this excuse. "But officer, I was being a jerk so I wouldn't create a traffic jam. Here's the study. Read it yourself!"
Of course the Germans would have a law for this, and a word to no less. :-)
Damn I wish I lived in Germany...
"Come to New York. We have cured traffic problems forever."
Sounds like someone got paid to make a study so they can feel better about themselves when they drive like an a-hole.
One of the freeways I drive down (I-496) has this happen all the time.
The catch is that these cars are still passing the people in the right lane, who are going at least 10mph below the speed limit.
To clarify, the speed limit on I-496 went from 55mph to 70mph a few years ago, and some people still don't seem to have caught on that the speed limit has increased.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
A useful study would've compared the overall cost, not just jams.
If jams go down 40% but wrecks, injuries, fatalities, and associated costs all go up 2%, that might or might not be "worth it." If they go up 0.00001% it probably is worth it. If they go up 1000% it probably is not worth it.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Yes, yes, yes. ;-) ) then they will have their crash some distance in front of you, rather than INTO you. That certainly sounds better to me.
I don't know how it is for your part of the world, but in the English Midlands the number of 'wannabe traffic police' hogging the fast lane seems to be increasing. I don't know why (maybe increased cost of fuel?).
If somebody is behind you, intending to drive faster than you are, you should let them past. Not only is it common courtesy; if they truely are a dangerous jerk (and everyone driving faster than you are at a given moment is a jerk, right?
This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
You have it exactly right.
emt 377 emt 4
People interested in traffic dynamics should check out this amateur hobbyist's blog at trafficwaves.org
The CB App. What's your 20?
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
What's causing traffic is the drivers in the other lanes that do not let or make difficult for the other drivers to merge. It's more efficient for traffic to merge in one point (preferably the end) than to merge at a bunch of different points over that 1/4 mile. Like a zipper! This is why you see solid white lines before merge points at interchanges.
Seriously, if they're going to do research based purely on computer simulations, the least they could do is release the source code of the simulation. If we're going to call these studies science, think how much science would be done if everyone had access and could edit the tools used in the study.
Yes...and when it works, it's wonderful. I can understand why this would be a law in Germany. (Hell, Germany, I'd assume that's an SOP.)
Here, though, there's people in the lane that's ending that, come hell or high water, WILL pass you, even if you're in front of them, even if it means driving on the shoulder and flooring the gas to do so...never mind I've got seven car lengths of open road behind me.
... between jerks and idiots. While the jerks will get through quicker by ignoring rules and other people, idiots will make the problem worse by ignoring the existence of things like other cars and the laws of Newtonian physics.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Part of the problem with this is that nobody ever goes -at- the speed limit. If everyone traveled the same speed, and someone were going slower, then you could pass on the left lane, and everything would be smooth. But it never works.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...but it sure is exciting to do on a 2-lane road!
This is called late merging. If everyone did it traffic would flow better, look it up.
So, when did getting around people disrupting the flow of traffic, become the rude part?
They'd be less offensive to me if they said, "40% of the drivers drive like they have a destination in mind."
Think of it like you're in a mall, rather than a freeway. In the mall you'd go: um, excuse me. And you'd walk around the rude people. The guy walking around isn't the rude one, sorry.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
On I-15 around Salt Lake City rude rivers are different. They seem to think that it's ok to get into a big clump of cars 3 or 4-lanes wide all going the same speed. That way, nobody can pass on any side... If you aren't going faster than the car to your right, you need to get in that lane and let people pass you on the left. Also, if you are in the far left (where I'm from, the 'fast' lane) and you see an open lane for half a mile in front of you, and 3+ cars directly behind you, it's probably time to get out of that lane... Common sense would help traffic flow better than rudeness.
Mod this guy up, slower traffic keep right.
This is a major problem in the widwest where timid drivers like to pick a lane and stay in it. You couple that with the people who speed up to not allow others to pass and you end up with a moving roadblock going 5 under the speed limit. On one occasion I was in a hurry behind these Vogons of the road and was a complete and total jerk and passed them on the shoulder. They flipped me off, I smiled and waved since I got what I wanted... clear road. Nothing is more beautiful.
I'm not a fan of the current trend of driving with the brights on either.
Hopefully I won't get trolled for this, but it's that kind of mentality that causes accidents. Not the part about slowing down in front of a tailgater necessarily, but intentionally speeding up as soon as they go to pass you in the other lane.
I agree with the frustrating left lane chain due to one asshole going slower or equal to the traffic on the right (usually equal, so that nobody can get by). Once I can actually get around someone like this, sometimes I will get in front of him and slow down significantly... well below the speed limit for two purposes: 1) It annoys him 2) it creates a gap where people in the chain can pass this asshole on the right. VA does have a left lane for passing only law, but i've never seen it enforced. My latest grip about the beltway is the ramp from 66E to get on 495S. It used to be two exit lanes that merge once they reach the beltway. Due to recent construction, the 2nd lane has been closed off and now there's only one exit lane. Since the merge was eliminated, I expected the flow of traffic to speed UP, however now, people tend to slow down or stop as if there was no place to merge at the end of the ramp..... The lane does not, in fact end, so I see no reason to even slow down--> the lane now has no merge and doesnt end. Why do people act as if they're driving off the edge of a cliff? Its gotten so bad in fact, that I now go a few miles further east and backtrack because its faster than sitting in this exit lane.
The simple fact is that it is inefficient to have each driver make independent decisions regarding operating their vehicle. The only way to reduce traffic jams is to take the individual driver out of the equation and replace it with a centralized decision maker (i.e. autonomous vehicles).
I think there's a difference between opportunistic drivers (the "good" kind of rude from this research) and assholes as you describe.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
I'm assuming that they tailgate you because you're not going a "nice fast speed" in their opinion and you failed to move to the right to let them pass. Because, if you had moved to the right as they were approaching, then you wouldnt be sitting there going slow and in their way causing them to tailgate.
Just a guess
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
According to my own research.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
So, you drive like you're in a coma? Strange...
warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
Finally, I'm vindicated for my superior driving skills!
Just doing my part to prevent traffic jams since 1975!
--- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
As an FYI not all states require the passing lane to be "yeilded" so long as you are going the speed limit. This is the case I believe in MD as well as NC, among others. If the speed limit is 65 and and both lanes have people next to each other going 65, get over it, no law is being broken.
And if the speed limit is 65, and I'm in the left lane going 75, and you come up on my ass flashing lights trying to get me to move over, you will get ignored. I don't give a shit if you want to go 85 in a 65 like 30% of the other drivers, the limit is 65 and I'm already going 75. I'm not going to move into the right lane and get stuck behind someone going 55, unable to change lanes because everyone on my left is going 25-30mph faster than me.
Dude, how the fuck do you shave while driving? No hot water, how the hell do you hold the brush, and I'm not going to go over speed bumps with a 5/8 inch Dovo half-hollow at my neck. God damn.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
In cases of slow traffic this is 100% true. In cases where traffic is moving at significant speed, waiting until the last moment to exit a lane (whether its ending, or peeling off, whatever) can cause substantial delays if the person merging has failed to line themselves up with a gap and has to hold up exiting traffic or causes a situation in which the other lane of traffic has to drastically adjust their speed to accommodate the merger.
Germany (indeed, most/all of Europe) get around this situation by requiring that people pass a driving test before allowing them to drive. In my homeland (the UK) its long, arduous, and if you don't get it right, you don't pass (and you can be failed for things like "lack of confidence"). In the US, you have to be able to navigate a few residential blocks, and you're allowed to drive if you don't miss more than 30% of the requirements; nevertheless, a not insignificant minority of the population requires multiple tries to pass.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
I'd like anyone who is making a left turn at a green traffic light, which is not a deliberate red light for left turns, to PULL THE HELL UP INTO THE INTERSECTION.
Two words: Zipper feeding.
It works, it's fast, it takes 2 lanes.
On several different occasions, I have ridden with ppl that drive like that (once up the Poudre, another going up the Thompson and another up to Fraser/winter park). I asked them why they were driving like and basically, they all said that they were afraid of the cliffs/river. In essence, they did not mind an accident in a head-on, or simply crashing into a pole, but going off a 200M/600Ft cliff or into the raging Poudre/Thompson, made them too afraid.
What I found interesting is that once those items were removed from their sight, they were all to happy to drive the speed limits. Sadly, those times were on the flats and not a one of them had the idea that the bypass was designed to allow other drivers pass such ppl. I even pointed it out to one, but he did not care. Sad. That attitude leads to accidents by those that will pass. I know; driving for an hour behind somebody that is doing 25/30 and not yielding when it is safe to pass frustrates me as well; years ago, I have passed several ppl on different occasions going up the Poudre.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
If you're passing a line of cars, you can't merge back into the RH lane.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
I know I slow down when people tailgate me very badly (within a meter), and speed up again when they change lanes. It's a guilty pleasure.
I do this do, but not the speeding up part (well, I speed back up to the speed I was going at before I was tailgated). And no, I am not in the f****** left lane when these idiots are on my rear bumper.
I'll only ride your ass if you aren't passing the person next to you, or if you don't get over when you have a chance. But even then, there's nobody in the world that can react fast enough to someone slamming on the brakes from tailgating distance, and the accident would probably end up being my fault, so I don't do it often. I think most of us (90% or more) understand this and drive that way. It only takes a few fucknuggets to screw it up for everyone else, though.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
So what the article is saying is that all those middle fingers are actually other driver's way of saying thanks for helping decrease traffic congestion? I'm glad to help!
Now excuse me while I drive on the median strip.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Or what about people who fail to get over when a sign says "Right lane ends 1/4 mile" Rather than get over now so traffic can move along smoothly (Because if you notice, once the lane ends, things pick up) they wait till the last damn second and hold everyone else up. Yeah sure that may not be against the law, but it still increases traffic (And road rage for that matter)
Actually, people merging over before the lane ends are the ones who cause the traffic slow down. How far before the end of the lane are you supposed to merge over?
I see the sign "Lane ends in 1/4 mile" so I merge over immediately, the car behind me (Car A)doesn't see the sign until he passes me, he then merges over IN FRONT OF ME, slowing everyone behind me down. The next car (Car B), can't merge over when he sees the sign because traffic in the other lane slowed down as a result of Car A, so he moves forward and merges IN FRONT OF CAR A. Three cars have now merged into the lane in front of the car that I merged in front of.
If instead I and the cars behind me had waited until the lane ended to merge and then merged every other car traffic would move much more rapidly. Oh yeah in my example above there will also be a couple of assholes who will use the now empty lane to rapidly move to the front of the line and merge where the lane ends, making the problem even worse.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
This isn't always possible. Often, there are people in the right hand lane going 70-75 mph and passing the speed limiters in the left lane who are traveling 65 mph. Just because you want to go 85 mph doesn't mean the slower motorists should automatically bow to your speedy abilities. This would, in my opinion, mean that *you* are driving like an asshole.
This is *most* evident when two tractor trailers are passing each other on a major two or three lane highway. But basic congestion causes it too... and whenever you drive like an asshole when there is already congestion... you are only going to make it worse.
Corollary: I've always thought cops should actively seek to give tickets to motorists who get passed on the left by drivers who are traveling at a legal speed limit. That behavior is just a dangerous as the asshole who weaves in and out of traffic. So, slow drivers in right-hand and middle lanes are assholes, too.
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
I am ecstatic that someone finally noticed my efforts to disburse traffic jams... after all these years... a tear comes to my eye.
Agreed with both you and GP. I slow down for tailgaters.
I also let drivers pass if they want to go a faster speed than I am, and I have the opportunity to get out of their way.
If there's a car right in front of me and someone is tailgating me, I don't hesitate to slow down until they're a safe distance behind me.
On a similar note, I just rolled through a stop sign to do my part in saving the environment.
One of my traffic engineering professors, the great Robert Herman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Herman), conducted a study in the 60s or 70s in which he compared the effectiveness of aggressive driving in various conditions. They collected data in various places, like New York City and Matamoros, Mexico, with Herman himself and various graduate student at the wheel.
The biggest payoff was in congested situations. For the aggressive driver only of course.
I can imagine Prof Herman and various graduate students all piled into a car and heading for Mexico. One thing I learned from him - to be a scientist, get out there and collect real data about the real world. TFA is a mere simulation - lets see if they can reproduce the results in real traffic.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
There are both legitimate and illegitimate scenarios on both sides -- if you're in the passing lane with no one in front of you, you're a moron, and even worse if you "block" someone from passing.
But there are also plenty of scenarios where traffic is dense and the passing lane is already blocked. When a reckless driver is trying to weave in and out of very small gaps in traffic in this scenario, it's very dangerous. "Blocking" that driver may actually be the safest thing to do.
I'd go so far as to say that reckless drivers who tailgate are the ones that cause both traffic jams AND many accidents. If people weren't afraid of some jerk cutting them off to get 1 space ahead in already-dense traffic, people would not follow so close together that they trigger and prolong traffic jams.
I always make an ugly face when passed, but that is just the natural state of my face.
From a safety standpoint, you are absolutely right. Pulling over is the safest thing to do. In my estimation, if a person is enough of an idiot to go flying down the highway at unsafe speeds, then I probably should get out of their way, because they're clearly not being careful.
But I have to admit, I get a bit of pleasure watching the guy behind me froth at the mouth because I delayed him a few seconds from getting to whatever thing he thinks is important enough that he doesn't mind endangering all the people around him. If someone wants to drive irresponsibly, they're going to have to deal with the fact that other people aren't going to like them for it.
I always wished I had a horn on the back of my car. Or, you know, Spy Hunter oil slicks.
Or we could make an effort to change traffic laws such that 100% of people following them is the most efficient system (assuming some sort of minimum level of safety). People would not be tempted to break traffic rules if it slowed down their commute. Obviously, this suggestion may not be possible in the real world but it's worth looking into.
I have seen cars reversing on the left lane to catch the missed exit, compare to that - slow car on left lane is a non issue. (Note: I live in Shanghai) haa...ok this is off topic.
And one day I have been Japan for sight seeing and drove on an Interstate equivalent. It's a two lanes per direction, moderate traffic. I was driving at 120kph on average, and passing ~80kph cars on the fast lane. (The speed limit is 80kph IIRC)
But not so unoften, there were cars which are driving at 140kph. Throughout an hour of trip I learned to pay attention to the mirror (note: I don't own a car and i drive may be once per year?), and look for cars catching me up. When there was car catching me up, I just waved back to the slow link with 80kph car and let the 140kph car behind me to pass. Then I went back to the fast lane passing the 80kph cars. And the 100kph cars on the passing lane did the same for me.
All in all it's a really pleasure and enjoyable experience...
Yep, I used to see this at one of the permanent road work sites I passed every weekend. You'd have a two- or three-mile stretch of slow-moving traffic in one lane leaving the other lane wide open, this despite repeated signs that read "USE BOTH LANES TO MERGE POINT."
What amused/infuriated me was that when I zipped down the empty lane to the merge point, I'd sometimes find a few cars pinned there because the drivers in the other lane must have decided that since they had to wait these cars should too. That rarely lasted too long, and even with the delay it beat crawling for fifteen minutes.
Your brain is not a computer.
Nice! I am finally part of the solution.
"Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the f-ing Peace Corps." - John 'Bluto' Blutarsky
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
Yes, if there is a safe opening in the right lane, and if there is no third lane to the left which the following driver could use to pass you instead.
So many tailgaters expect you to move over and make way even if there is no safe gap. After all, they're willing to endanger their lives, why should you be so picky about yours?
I would imagine the same principle might apply to those who in crowds who rush inbetween people or push past others.
While similar i'm not sure it fits 'the mob as a fluid' theory though:
http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2009/01/physics-of-crowds.html
Itself somewhat dismissed (at least in passing) for disregarding irrationality here:
http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnology/tq/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13174313
In all probability it may be that a cross of all factors is at work. Perhaps some people see it as queuing while others always look for the alternative way through.
This UID is 7651 digits too high to subjectively infer IQ from.
...to be a skilled driver. All you need to do is pay attention.
And this has been another installament of Captain Obvious!
I'm with you there, I used to like to speed. Now I like to cruise in the slow lane, and I have the opposite peeve: Asshats who refuse to use the two empty lanes on my left to pass, and ride my frickin bumper. I'll give em a minute, then the foot comes off the gas. Had one guy wait until we got down to 35 before he passed me. So sorry, is changing lanes really that hard?
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Just for clarification, I often drive in the right hand lane, and rarely slow for tailgaters in the left hand lane. Single lane roads or the right lane is fair game though. People *still* tailgate me in the right lane.
For the real idiots I'm willing to pull off the road and let them pass. Given our Canadian sense of passive aggressiveness, that's a fairly strong insult. :)
Right. In the fictional roadways, people in the right lane are going under the speed limit.
In reality, the people with the most contempt for the speed limit are the ones that are using the "passing lane".
Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
Since the article is talking about scientists studying pedestrian traffic, they have no data on the effect crashes have on the slow down.
We know that people walking in a confined section of sidewalk acting like jerks keeps the flow of traffic moving, but this does not really apply to vehicles since they cannot add in a few variables such as crashes from being too close, crashes from changing lanes in front of others etc.
I think the article title is misleading (not the slashdot headline, but the actual article title) as it describes driving, when the research was clearly geared towards pedestrians.
Nonsense. Blocking them like that prevents them from cutting you off on the right. It's controlling the situation. While it might drive the douche into a greater rage, and hence be more likely to do something stupid to cause an accident, it keeps him safely behind you.
And face it, this situation only presents itself in thick traffic. This is not a case of someone wanting to go faster, it is the case of someone trying to leapfrog as many cars as possible, evidence of a dim mind that believes that progress is made not with velocity but by the number of cars passed.
If the speed limit is 65 and and both lanes have people next to each other going 65, get over it, no law is being broken.
Not necessarily. Some states call that a moving roadblock, which impedes the flow of traffic. You can also get a ticket for going too slow on the highway, for the same reason.
I'm not going to move into the right lane and get stuck behind someone going 55, unable to change lanes because everyone on my left is going 25-30mph faster than me.
OK, so instead of inconvenience yourself by driving behind someone going slower than you want to, you instead inconvenience everyone behind you wanting to go faster than you. Hey man, thanks for making the world a better place. I mean, it's all about you, right? Screw everyone else.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Some of us are pussies. (Safety razors, or worse, electrics...)
I do too. No speed limits on the Autobahn and they have F1 and the Nurburgring. My recipe for an advanced civilization.
Wow.. lots of hostility below.
I'm sure someone's going to pick on my "rarely" slow down in the left lane comment. I *only* slow down in the left lane when tailgated there's some sort of imminent danger from the driving situation because of the introduction of someone speeding behind me. I will pull into the right lane as soon as is safe.
I *will* slow down if I deem the driving situation unsafe, and I don't get any guilty pleasure from a "left lane tailgater slowdown".
This justifies a signifigant increase in risking someone else's life and/or livelyhood? Ends justifies the means? Wow please increase the minimum driving age to 30 ... I mean if I flip someone the middle finger is it ok for them to wreck me or follow me to my destination and shoot me? I mean, afterall, that would be rather rude for me to do that and breaking a rule of two hands on the steering wheel.
"Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
I've seen a couple guys over the years that have. I would imagine they are using an electric razor or trimmer of some somesort.
"Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
There's a reason we don't have flying cars: people tend to drive (despite their skill level) like idiots in the first place.
I understand their intent here: sometimes breaking the rules helps the common 'herd'. I agree. And I take driving very seriously every time- no cellphone, no texting, no makeup...you get the idea.
But merely "driving like a jerk" is a discription of someone cutting off another driver, for instance. He stops, cars behind him stop, and so on- NOT what they're talking about here.
PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE because what they have to offer is important and easily misunderstood!
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
There's a special place in hell for people like you. Thanks for making driving more dangerous! You are not doing anyone any "favours" or preventing any accidents. People like you cause traffic jams.
If the speed limit is 65 and and both lanes have people next to each other going 65, get over it, no law is being broken.
That just means that your legislators are utter failures. There does not exist an excuse for failing to prevent people from blocking the freeways. This is the primary cause of congestion and accidents.
I'm not going to move into the right lane and get stuck behind someone going 55, unable to change lanes because everyone on my left is going 25-30mph faster than me.
So you'll stick *everybody else in the entire passing lane*r behind your dumb, slow moving ass and you thing that's somehow ok while it's a great tragedy to expect you to keep up with the flow of traffic WTF you utterly sleazy self-centered piece of garbage wrapped in skin?!?!?! I'm truly amazed at how fucking vile some people go out of their way to choose to be.
*You* are the problem in this situation. *You* are the jerk, and *you* are the bad guy.
You refuse to keep up with the traffic in the passing lane yet you also refuse to remain in the lane appropriate to your speed and driving abilities.
The people going 85 in the *passing lane* are going with the flow of traffic and are driving appropriately for the conditions. You are not doing either of those things. You are intentionally and with malice aforethought blocking the passing lane in order to prevent other people from using the roads they pay for in a the perfectly safe manner they choose. You are increasing everybody's risk, and you're doing it solely so that you can be a jerk to the people around you. If you can not keep up with the normal pace of traffic in the fast lane, then the only decent, rational, or appropriate thing for you to do is stay out of the way of the people who are traveling at the proper speed. There is nothing about your actions that justify the problems you are willfully choosing to inflict on the poeple around you solely due to the fact that you can't be bothered to go the appropriate speed. The appropriate speed is never determined by the laws which you've already admitted your legislators are failures at determining, it's determined by the speed traffic is traveling. You are in the wrong and there is nothing that could possibly justify your active asshattery. Please stop it and start acting as if you were a decent human being instead of the malicious asshole you declared yourself to be.
You're not even helping yourself and you're fucking over tons of people around you. I mean think that through, Sparky, and consider what a vile scumbag your chosen course of action *proves* you to be absolutely and beyond any possibility of a doubt.
everything is slowed down for a long time.
And unnecessary $ will be going to the lawyers sooner or later.
New Economic Perspectives
My take on that, is that as long as you are actually passing somebody, you have every right to remain in the passing lane, even if some %#^@*! wants to go 10 mph faster than you. However, once the lane to your right is clear for a reasonable distance, you must yield the passing lane, even if you think the guy behind you is going unreasonably fast. This is the law here in MA and I believe most states enforce "keep right except to pass". Driving the speed limit does not entitle you to the left lane, even though it's an apparent contradiction that the speeder behind you has the right to pass you.
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
This study also assumes people who drive like jerks have 100% success in not hitting other drivers.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Amen. Another rule that should ALWAYS be followed is "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS". In many states it's posted "Slower traffic keep right" which is a joke because fewer people deem themselves to be "slower traffic", seemingly oblivious to the 5 or 6 cars waiting behind them.
This is compounded by 4 lane roads that only give drivers 2 choices of speed as well as drillrods (and all of Los Angeles) who think changing lanes is some sort of attempt for emotional rape or assault and react accordingly.
Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
I have a theory that merging brings out psychological flaws in people:
- Those who change lanes as soon as they see the Shift Left 1/4 Mile sign rather than waiting to merge at the point where the sign specified, suffer from a lack of assertiveness and poor self worth. An irrational fear of the "what if they won't let me into the left lane?!" variety causes them to avoid potential confrontation.
- Those stuck in traffic who resent drivers speeding along an empty lane to merge where the sign specified, and who take the opportunity to block merging traffic have a classic negativistic personality disorder (i.e., passive-aggressive plus mad at the world plus envious and resentful plus feeling cheated by life).
- Those who wait to merge until the lane ends so they can smoothly change lanes, alternating one car at a time in an elegant ballet of efficiency have healthy personalities when it comes to driving.
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
What constitutes "slower traffic"? Slower than the speed limit? Slower than the median speed of all cars within a 1km radius? Slower than the guy behind you?
Bullshit! I switched to a single blade to get a closer shave than those damn 5 blade shits, which do better than the Norelco. Have fun with the buzzy thing tearing up your skin, too.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I can just see tomorrow's article about slashdotter road rage victims who took this article's advice. Luckily, if this happens to me, I have a plan to explain the logic in detail to calm the other driver down.
People on the Interstate slow down to let the person merging onto the highway. On the Autobahn, when you are merging, you yield unless someone is nice enough to move over to the left to give you room.
If you are in the left lane and see someone coming up behind you, you wait until they are right on your ass, then slow down, and play games instead of trying to get over to the right. On the Autobahn if you are rear ended in the left lane, you get the ticket, not the guy who rear ended you.
Some "good samaritan" will see someone waiting to come out of a parking lot, and come to almost a complete stop to let him out, being a "nice guy" to the one car, while pissing off the 10 or 20 behind him. If the "good samaritan" would have just kept driving, the person leaving the parking lot would only have to wait a few more seconds.
You could be the only person on the road, and the jackass who just got to the intersection will putt putt out in front of you instead of waiting to pass before entering the roadway.
The self appointed "set the speed limit" driver who will do everything in his power to make sure everyone behind him can go no faster than he can. Through all his paying attention to the people behind him, he invariably ends up driving slower than the speed limit pissing off everyone behind him.
The "brake light flasher". He is either riding with his foot over the brake pedal, or is just a nervous nelly and slows down for every divot, pothole, loose pebble, and unidentifiable stain in the road.
The people who have to come to a complete stop and drive slowly over the railroad tracks that are almost smoother than the roadway itself. Rather than letting their shock absorbers work the way they are supposed too, they want to feel every single bump as they creep their way across the tracks.
Then I clump all these together. The cell phone users, the arguing couples, the newpaper readers, the texters, and gps users. They all drive like friggin morons.
Finally everyone who just drives in their own little world and not worrying about how their lack of attentiveness affects the vehicles around them.
These are just a few.
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
Only if there's gaps for the cars to zipper together and no one tries jumping the queue driving on the shoulder for an additional four car lengths and THEN jamming his hood in the line.
Like communism, late merging works in theory, but each fails to take into account the assholic nature of man.
"Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?", George Carlin
Are they rude or simply better? Perhaps they have driven in countries like Germany where drivers are aware of their traffic surroundings and often break "rules" in order to allow traffic to continue moving along. They also had a tnedency to complain of American drivers on the road as a danger - they are right!
It's funny how there are so many bad drivers among the general population, but everyone posting here is great at it.
There are some people that should recognize they should never be in the 40%. If you drive a 1990 Geo Metro, for example, you should know that your car can't accelerate to take advantage of a pass-on-the-right opportunity to unglue traffic, and should instead be part of the rule-following majority.
Likewise, if there's a high-end sports car in your clump, you may wish to give them space to break free. The driver is more likely to be a jerk (yes I drive one) so he may cut you off in an unsafe fashion anyway (though I don't). Plus he can cut and accelerate to get out of the way, potentially breaking up the jam. And, once he's free, he'll run as radar detector for the next few miles at least, allowing you to go any speed up to his without risk of being pulled over.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
"The last moment" is obviously defined by the speed of traffic. Higher speed = earlier merge. Duh. But if everyone in the persistent lane is leaving a sufficient following distance, it's trivial for the vanishing lane to merge. "Punishers" in the persistent lane who refuse to allow alternate merge ("reissverschlussverfahren," I love it) by following too closely are the real trouble-makers and rule-breakers.
You save only 59 seconds over 8 miles by going 75 instead of 65. Do you really have to pass that guy? Do the Math!
When a pileup happens, I think it negates the entire advantage gained by "lubricating" blocks of law-abiding vehicles. The study mentioned didn't look at the likelihood of collisions as a result of rude driving behavior, so it's premature to advocate rude driving behavior as a means to reduce time spent in congestion.
DRIVE RIGHT! PASS LEFT!
Repeat as necessary.
DRIVE RIGHT! PASS LEFT!
Don't spend ANY more time in the left lane than necessary to pass and return.
How hard is that?
DRIVE RIGHT! PASS LEFT!
Signs with this should be up under every speed limit sign and cops should be giving tickets for it at every opportunity until people get it. It's already on your drivers test.
I remember a couple times in heavy traffic - having a long view of the next mile or two of traffic, and seeing a much larger portion of the cars in the left lane...while the right lane moved along consistently faster. People equate the left lane with the 'fast' lane.
It is, but only if it isn't all overcrowded with lemmings.
Forgot one: Those who zip past the point where the merge is supposed to take place, using the emergency lane to jump a few cars further in line suffer from narcissistic personality disorder (i.e., generally contemptuous of others, lack a mature conscience and empathy, have a sense of entitlement, and take advantage of others to achieve their own ends).
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
Except that the "rules" for our roads are created to set standards for the worst cars with the worst drivers driving them. If we actually had stronger requirements on who actually got a drivers license and stricter policies on what vehicles (and how old) were allowed to be on the road then we could increase speed limits and reduce required enforcement. Those 40% are the people that are being restricted because of the bottom 40%. The bottom 40% are those people who do not pay attention or cannot pay proper attention to the road. That 40% includes people who talk/text on their cell phone or have any other item or device that impairs their ability to drive their vehicle. If you need to take a call right then and there then pull over, put your car into park and take the call/call back. This also includes people who (for whatever reason) cannot pay attention to the road. My own mother falls into this category. She is never actively paying attention to her surroundings while she is driving. She "sees" the road and the lights and everything, but she really isn't paying attention to it. She got pulled over once for passing a cop doing about 15 over the limit not realizing who she was passing. I don't hate my mother or anything, but I also would feel significantly safer with her (and everyone like her) off the roads. And then there are the elderly. I don't hate the elderly either, but there is a point where you need to realize that you no longer have the ability to safely drive a vehicle and you are a detriment to everyone around you by continuing to be on the roads.
I took a quick look at the article, and it does not appear to be about vehicular traffic. Here are a few lines from the introduction:
"It is notable that the jamming in vehicular traffics has natures different from that in pedestrian traffics. The former is explained by the time delay in the responses of the drivers, and this is the reason why the jamming may easily occur with vehicles only in one direction [10]. In the latter case, on the other hand, the jamming is caused by the collision of agents in opposite directions [7]. This study is mainly focused on this pedestrian case.
In the present work, we use the CA approach and find that the minimal risk for a jamming of the pedestrian flow occurs when a small fraction of traffic-rule ignorers is present within a majority of traffic-rule abiders."
From this, it would appear that they're talking about pedestrians, not vehicles, in the article, so the post title here is misleading.
Proprietary, closed source drivers are the biggest barrier to the perceived capability and adoption of Free Software (tm). If there are Rude Drivers, we need to ensure that these are open-sourced, without binary obfuscation or other proprietary claims made through digital rights restrictions, etc.
Gimme the source for the Rude Drivers!
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
You can take advantage of some drivers' impatience and lead foot to determine if there are any cops ahead. Simply linger in the passing lane when someone is driving right on your bumper. Don't get over until you can tell they're about to pass you on the right, then get over. The irritated driver will then shoot ahead much faster than they probably intended to go. If there are any police within the next few miles, the speeding driver will draw their attention.
Ride my ass and expect to go under the limit.
After all, one can never be too careful their assets.
When driving on the highway I like those jerks in trucks who try to intimidate other drivers into pulling over into the right lane by riding on their rear bumpers. I do as they wish, then pull back out and follow them, taking advantage of their lane clearing behavior. They may be rude, possibly dangerous, but they do help keep the 'fast' lane fast.
Loose lips lose spit.
I get pissed at the guy idling in the passing lane with his blinker on trying to wait for an opening in the traffic in the exit lane because he apparently forgot this was his exit. Take the next exit and backtrack! Now instead of him being 20 minutes late, he's 10 minutes late, and 100 other people are also 10 minutes late.
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
He's a thing I do: When the light in front of me turns red, I get my foot off the gas, and I let the car decelerate towards the red light.
When I'm in the zone, I pretty much don't stop at red lights because they have the time to turn back to green before I get to them.
Now, here's the problem with that: The masses of idiots who are in a fucking hurry to go park on the red. They cut me off, and then I have to stop behind them while I wait for them to start up again when the light turns green. Some of them are salvageable, as after seeing me do my thing for a few lights they understand the principle and start laying off the gas when they see the next red, some are not, and insist on cutting me off and, I dunno... win the street race going on in their demented little heads. First one wasting gas and brake lining wins! Woo!
Anyway, leadfoot, remember that red lights mean "stop accelerating", not "this is the finish line to the race, quick, get here before anybody else" :)
You can't take the sky from me...
While they make the situation better for everybody, the people breaking the rules benefit the most. This is sort of like the "tragedy of the commons," with a twist.
It seems to me like this is a case of "the rules are wrong".
You can't take the sky from me...
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is)
If I'm in the left lane, I'm passing. If I'm not passing fast enough for you, tough shit. I'm already going 10 miles over the speed limit. I'm not going to slow down 10 to 20 mph just so you can go 20 over.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States.
Espero que la gente de los Estados Unidos no son tan mal como este :)
I guess thats all I have to say.
I live in Massachusetts and drive 30K to 45K miles per year, and I see a LOT of masshattery. I've been in so many near misses arising from people who use the highways as their own personal slalom, people who tailgate, and from people who have no clue what red lights, stop signs, and yield signs mean.
Usually I own and drive fast cars. For a number of years I had a Ford F-150 and then a GMC Sierra 1500. I always hated driving those things because 0-60 and 50-70 could be measured in weeks (exaggeration, obviously) - unsafe for avoidance.
A few weeks ago I was stopped in a traffic jam on the parking lot we affectionately call Route 128. I was rear-ended by a semi. He wasn't going fast but the problem was he just wasn't paying attention and he mis-shifted, and a mass of 30K to 60K pounds isn't easy to stop. So, my truck was toast. The bumper and frame were bent, and the bed shifted over. I managed to get the bed on straight (all by myself - yes, I know how to use breaker bars and sockets) but the truck was on its last legs anyhow so I junked it.
Well, from there I decided it was time to get something more sporty. I was looking at the Rav4 w/V6 because I need cargo space for work, but we decided that if the company needs a truck, the company should buy one, not me. So, that freed me up to buy something different. I went with a Saab. Now I feel safe again.
Why do I think a (relatively) fast car is needed? I encounter a LOT of asshattery. About six years ago, I had two simultaneous collisions happen in front of me (lane drop, massholes being massholes and not yielding to the left lane, and someone in the left lane wanted to pass on the right). The collisions were too close for me to stop, so I just nailed it and navigated through unscathed.
Since I bought this car last week I've had massholes weaving through traffic almost broadside my driver-side fender, some charlie-uniform-november-tango pull right out in front of me, and so forth. People are too impatient. I drive the limit, understand right of way, and the way people drive in Massachusetts drives me nuts.
I have a clean driving record and drive very conservatively when there are other cars around. Why can't everyone do the same? Why can't people drive sensibly when there are other people on the road? It's partially because of other people I choose performance-oriented vehicles (that, and on empty rural roads they're just fun!).
It's due to ignorance of others that we have the ridiculous 65mph speed limit instead of unlimited speed on rural highways. It's due to asshattery that insurance rates are outrageous. It's due to masshattery that the gubbament can justify traffic light cameras.
It's due to ignorant asshole drivers that my door has a dent in it. I parked my car, went into the store, came out, and found that someone had opened their door against mine, right at the B pillar. So now, my car door looks like I opened it against a wall or something. The other car's paint rubbed off so there is no mar, but now every time I walk up to the car my eye is drawn right to that ding. I had the thing only four days, I parked out in the boonies, and some asshole still managed to ding my car. It's amazing.
Asshattery. It's human nature. Massholes are the perfect example of that.
I may be a masshole, but I refuse to drive like one. Even if one is self-centered/selfish, they should think about how their driving like assholes affects their own insurance rates and spawns new legislation restricting their own rights - if they won't think about how their actions will affect others. If you're selfish, think of the negative consequences for being a jerk. If everyone followed the law and also courtesy, traffic jams would be rare. Want to jockey for position? Just go ahead. I won't be bothered. I usually take off quick but if someone is jockeying, I just let them go. It's not worth the aggravation and the risk.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them.
Alright, that's frustrating, but I'll one up ya: People who are in a super hurry to get in front of you... and then go slow.
They know they won't be driving fast, but they HAVE to be in front! It's more important than driving safely, more important than driving fast, they have to be in front. That's people I wish I could take out with rocket propelled grenades.
You can't take the sky from me...
no s$it. if you get out of my way, I don't have to shut down my cruise control and slow down, all the while riding your bumper.
use your freaking rear view mirror.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
Why? Simple: it's polite. (It might also be illegal for you not to get over; driving in the left lane when not passing is illegal in many places, but disregarding that, it's still rude not to move over.)
Even if it isn't illegal, driving the speed limit in the left lane when you know there are people behind you who want to pass is rude. Yes, they're trying to speed and that would be breaking the law, but first and foremost it's not your job to force them to obey the speed limit. Second, if it's legal for you to do the speed limit in the left lane, it's also legal for the guy in front of you to do 5 to 10 under in the left lane (the minimum speed limit is what, 45?), and you wouldn't like that either... so you should have the same respect for the people behind you just out of politeness.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
You're are a sick little fucker and beneath contempt. I adamantly hope that you die soon and painfully you vile evil worm.
I suspect you two won't become friends.
Get your own free personal location tracker
My experience has shown time and again that it is the rule breakers that start the jams. It is always with respect to a merge. Some jerk tries to get by just one more car and squeezes in at the last point forcing the cars behind him to stop so they don't hit him and voila, traffic jam. If he had just merged sooner, or followed an every other pattern there wouldn't have been a problem. Then again LonGisland drivers are easily the worst in the nation, what should I expect?
Traffic accidents cause traffic jams.
People driving in unpredictable fashions increase the risk of accidents.
The increased accident rate of 40% of people ignoring rules would have an inverse impact that would outweigh any optimal reactions to existing jams.
This is not the result of a scientific experiment. This is the result of common sense based on my daily commute, including my experience as a motorcyclist.
Calm down, chief. If he's going 75 in the passing lane like he said, and the other lane is going 55 he is exactly where he should be. If he's passing, he belongs in the passing lane. Your right to pass him is not more important than his right to pass others. If you think it is, that makes you the "utterly sleazy self-centered piece of garbage wrapped in skin."
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I've lived in the L.A. area nearly my whole life so I've had my fair share of experience with traffic.
I can see where some rude behavior could reduce congestion, but a whole lot of the activities that rude drivers engage in wreaks havoc. One of the biggest issues is people who wait till the last possible minute to merge at an interchange or onramp, they will invariably end up slowing down a non-merging lane dramatically while they attempt to force their way in to the merging lane, while the merging lane is disrupted causing it to slow further. I regularly see people get out of a lane of traffic to drive the last few hundred feet of an onramp before forcing their way in 2-3 carlengths ahead of where they were.
Other rude behaviors which significantly increase congestion include driving slowly (often below the speed limit) in the left lane (or any lane but the right) and turning into the wrong lane (i.e.turn right into the left lane)
where the people would do things like drive three abreast on a two-lane road, because one person was passing without enough clearance. The oncoming car would slide out to make room. Their traffic looked crazy, but everybody knew what they were doing, and were willing to accommodate other drivers without throwing a fit.
Evil is the money of root.
Not necessarily. Some states call that a moving roadblock, which impedes the flow of traffic. You can also get a ticket for going too slow on the highway, for the same reason.
and if you read my previous post, you would see that I said in some states, that is not the case. For example, the state I drive in.
OK, so instead of inconvenience yourself by driving behind someone going slower than you want to, you instead inconvenience everyone behind you wanting to go faster than you. Hey man, thanks for making the world a better place. I mean, it's all about you, right? Screw everyone else.
Yes, good job, blame it on my self centerdness and completely ignore the dangers of a 30mph difference in 2 lanes of heavey traffic. Good job.
a sick little fucker and beneath contempt
so he might be the kind of friend I get along with.
The people going 85 in the *passing lane* are going with the flow of traffic and are driving appropriately for the conditions.
I'm sorry, I'm pretty fucking sure that the *law* states that the speed limit is 65mph, and that the *law* states that as long as you are driving the speed limit, you can be in either lane. So by driving 75mph, but not moving over and slowing down to 55 so that you can go 85, I am the one being a jerk and causing a dangerous situation. Because driving down a mountain interstate at 85 mph 6 feet away from someone elses ass end isn't dangerous at all. I beg you, please reconsider.
I had plenty ot speeding tickets over the years for 5 or 10 miles over. I don't want to go 60. I want to go 65, but, I'm not going over. Kiss my ass!
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
Yeah, that's great when that's an option, but IME, that's rarely when the problem occurs. IIt seems to happen most often to me when I am stuck behind traffic ahead, but traffic on the right is backed up and going even slower, so there is nowhere in the right lane for me to go. In that case, the tailgater is only making a bad situation worse.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
In Alaska, Maryland, North Carolina and Ohio, vehicles can drive in the left lane so long as they're moving at the speed limit.
:)
Interesting read on the topic.
If there is wide open space to my right and I have no fear of getting stuck behind 18 wheelers going 55, I'll move over. But otherwise, you're just going to have to be patient that you can only go 10 over the posted speed limit
Here in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area, we have dozens of fixed and mobile speed cameras on our state highways. (There is currently a drive to ban them - go to camerafraud.com to learn more about their drive - but that's another story). A big part of the pro-camera argument coming from the vendors (and the Highway Patrol - called DPS in Arizona) is that the cameras significantly improve traffic flow and make the roads "smoother and more efficient" for drivers, and this study flies in the face of this oft-preached philosophy.
I'm one of those "jerk drivers" this study was talking about, and my anecdotal experience has been that since the cameras were installed and turned on last November, the drivers now will not move over and let other drivers by (this behavior suddenly appeared the week of the installation, so there's strong correlation between the two events.) Whether it is because of speed camera fear, pride, revenge-driven anger at speeders, or gadget-induced ignorance of the drivers around them (cell phones, texting, etc.), they are now clogging ALL lanes at cruise control like speeds. (In many cases I have seen these drivers taking advantage of their "smooth" time by choose to text or call other people or do some other menial (and dangerous) task while being oblivious of the rolling traffic jam that is forming behind them.)
When I can finally get past these drivers and go around them at 15+ over the ridiculously low 55 or 65 MPH speed limits they are rolling along at (keep in mind that these are speed limits on newer, modern, wide, and smooth 10+ lane highways), it breaks these clogs up for various reasons. Sometimes the slow drivers realize that they are a problem and move over. At other times, other drivers are encouraged to speed up and go around the slower drivers. Either way, the traffic cesspool that forms due to one or two "law abiding citizens" that don't move out of the way is broken up - by me, a "jerk" driver.
So, if this study is correct, and speed cameras continue to go up everywhere, and license plates are tracked in order to enforce speeds EVERYWHERE, traffic is going to suffer greatly in Arizona, unless us "jerks" keep it moving more efficiently.
Switching lanes unecessarily is an additional danger that is not needed if you would SLOW THE FUCK DOWN AND DO THE SPEED LIMIT JACK-ASS!
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
It's funny.
A lot of the problems with driving in the US (and indeed in the rest of the world) are due to people doing what they think is right or normal, but adversely affect everyone else. I am sure they don't think they are doing anything wrong and are happy in their own little world.
I don't believe there is a law for the "zipper procedure" when merging traffic in the UK, but people sure as hell do it. It makes merging a LOT easier and friendlier. The on-ramp/slip-road is there for a number of reasons. It allows you to reach the speed of the other drivers before entering the main road. It also allows a longer distance in which to "zip-up" the two lanes that are merging. People in the US especially do not see or do not understand that it is a merge. People on the main road have legal right of way, but strictly prioritising one lane like this will rapidly result in hold-ups for both lanes. This is especially true when people have to resort to cutting in front of others to get into the main road, and also differences in opinion when some people like to use the entire on-ramp but others prefer to stop at the beginning and merge when they see a gap.
Grow up. Use the entire on-ramp. Zip-up at the end. Get the hell out of the fast lane if someone wants to pass.
so he might be the kind of friend I get along with.
Unlikely.
You think that your ability to fuck people over solely for your sick amusement is far more important than a person's right to save the life of their loved one. That is sick and evil beyond anything I would associate myself with. That's who you are, Sparky. An absolutely vile monster.
I choose friends who are hands down better people than you are. I don't associate with people who are, like you yourself bragged about being, driven purely by their hatred of other people living their lives without your approval.
Oh well, when and if you get your head pulped with steel toes boots for acting like the monster you brag about being you'll know damn well why it happened and that you richly deserved it.
I know that I saved my family from the fate that a shitbag like yourself attempted to inflict upon us.
I'm quite obviously a far better person that you could ever hope to be and I have nothing but contempt for you because I know how fucking pointless and *murderous* your cowardly douchebaggery really is in practice.
Go die in a fire before you end up killing decent people.
The speed limit is the speed limit. Don't like it? Lobby the state legislature; otherwise, fuck off!
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
I don't know where you live, but I've never, ever seen a 30mph difference between 2 consecutive lanes in heavy traffic. Maybe the difference between the far left and far right lanes is a lot, but not 2 consecutive lanes. There's no danger for you to slow down to match the speed of the lane next to you (with your blinker on), get over, and let everyone pass. There's no danger there. It's all about you, it's not about safety. It's also dangerous to be a moving obstacle in high-speed heavy traffic, but you don't seem worried about being that.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
This is why in most states it is against the law to not pass in the left most (passing) lane. The exception is when someone is in front of you but if you're in the left hand lane and are not passing someone to the right regardless if someone is behind you or not then you need to move over.
I wish this law was enforced and not the speed limit laws. If the passing lane laws where enforced there would be a lot less traffic, a lot less crashes, and a lot less deaths on the road.
Okay, let's pick the 405 N transition to the W 101. It's very popular for 'rude' drivers to wait till the last minute before merging (I don't do this by the way). It used to bother me till I realized that a large percent of the time they're filling gaps left by lazy drivers who lag in their response to the stop and go of heavy traffic. If the 'rude' drivers merged earlier the backup would be much larger. Sure, there are a small percent who dangerously stop/slow traffic in their lane when they can't gracefully find that gap but overall I think they help.
You think that your ability to fuck people over solely for your sick amusement is far more important than a person's right to save the life of their loved one.
Incorrect logic. Had he known that you were trying to save the life of your loved one, and he'd acted the same, that would be correct.
He was just being thoughtless, not malicious/evil.
Get your own free personal location tracker
There are many fine traffic modeling journals out there. Physical Review E is not one of them. More telling is the lack of any references to any transportation journal articles regarding traffic flow models. While cellular automata approaches to modeling traffic flow have become increasingly popular in the last two decades, nothing in the abstract or citations leads me to believe they used an established traffic flow model.
Have mod points right now, but wanted to get your 10+ year old stale knowledge updated a bit instead.....Actually, Montana has had a set speed limit since May 28, 1999 as Montana was threatened by the federal government that it would withhold all highway funding unless Montana would enact speed limits. Just FYI, this is one of the main ways the federal government controls state governments; by withholding funds.
Take a look at http://www.us-highways.com/montana/mtspeed.htm for more info on current Montana speeds based on type of vehicle. In case you don't want to click the link, this means that for cars during daylight hours, the maximum speed limit on interstate highways is 75 mph (or 120.7008 kph).
In addition, during the time when Montana "didn't have a speed limit", the rule of the road during daytime driving was to drive in a "Reasonable and Prudent" way. Requiring people to THINK when driving is so much safer.
Here is the text from http://www.us-highways.com/montana/reasonable.htm
What was Reasonable and Prudent?
Basic Rule Speed Restriction
Motorists were to comply with the "basic rule" speed limit when they drove, in a manner that did not unreasonably endanger other highway users. To ensure this, drivers were to be constantly alert to changing traffic conditions and adjust their speed as conditions varied. These conditions were numerous and could change rapidly. Thus drivers were to be alert for:
* the amount and type of traffic sharing the highway with them. The traffic could have been heavy or light and may have included trucks, cars, motorhomes, farm equipment, and motorcycles.
* changing weather conditions that could have affected driver visibility and road conditions. These conditions could have included fog or snow and road surface conditions such as water or ice.
* the type of vehicle they were driving, particularly the condition of their brakes and the weight of their vehicle, which affects braking ability.
* the character of the highway they were driving. Drivers were to adjust their speed for hills or for winding and narrow roads.
* the presence of intersections, railway grade crossings or pedestrians.
Driving in a careful and prudent manner, complying with the basic rule, required drivers to be constantly alert and mindful of their personal responsibility not only for their own safety but also for that of other highway users.
Sig Return: 204 No Content
Tailgating someone only makes you look like an asshole.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
If someone is honking their horn and flashing their lights, I'll get out of the way. Maybe they really need to get somewhere fast. I have no problems with that. But if Darby needs to think I am
An absolutely vile monster
and that I
fuck people over solely for your sick amusement
well, he's wrong, but then his beliefs are his own business. Can't please everyone. Last I checked, I was talking about being the responsible party. Oh well.
You know, I think I'm going to click that little Slashdot friend button, anyway.
I don't know where you live
Hagerstown, MD to Frederick, MD. Small mountain range in between. I70.
but I've never, ever seen a 30mph difference between 2 consecutive lanes in heavy traffic. Maybe the difference between the far left and far right lanes is a lot, but not 2 consecutive lanes.
Except in this case, most of the stretch only has 2 lanes, so the far left and the far right ARE consecutive. And when tractor trailers and grandmas are in the right lane going 55 (sometimes 65), and traffic in the left lane is going 80/85 (sometimes higher), then simple math dictates there can be a 30mph difference in speed. Except the speed isn't constant, because everytime someone stuck in the right lane tries to get in the left lane, both lanes end up slamming on their brakes. And since it can be heavy traffic (not quite bumper to bumper, but heavy still) as far as you can see, you know that if you move over, then your going to be the next guy who either gets stuck in the right lane, or dangerously causes 40 cars to hit the brakes.
There's no danger for you to slow down to match the speed of the lane next to you (with your blinker on), get over, and let everyone pass.
In order to let "everyone" pass, you would be in the right lane all day, because there will always be another car behind you on the way to DC thats moving faster than you want to. And no, it isn't dangerous to slow down and move to the right. The danger is in trying to move back to the left with such a drastic speed difference. Coming from someone who has been ran off the road at over 60 mph and had to have half their ear stitched back on, you can eat my ass if you think it isn't.
There's no danger there
Again, BS.
It's all about you, it's not about safety.
Right AND Wrong. It's all about me BECAUSE it's all about safety.
It's also dangerous to be a moving obstacle in high-speed heavy traffic, but you don't seem worried about being that.
Then quite trying to drive 20 mph over the speed limit, which by definition is reckless driving, and the heavy traffic won't be so high speed, and the danger diminishes. But no. It much more important to try to shave 3 minutes off your 30 mile commute (7 minutes if you are going the 70 miles to DC) than it is to have just a little more patience.
This has been my experience, although other commenters seem to have the opposite. Personally, I'm impressed that Germany has their own 24 letter word just for the law.
You think that your ability to fuck people over solely for your sick amusement is far more important than a person's right to save the life of their loved one.
Incorrect logic. Had he known that you were trying to save the life of your loved one, and he'd acted the same, that would be correct. He was just being thoughtless, not malicious/evil.
I'll just say this one thing: if you are going to go out of your way to be a dick, you better be god damned certain that you have all of the facts, fully understand all potential implications of your actions, and are prepared for the possibility that you are making a bad assumption about the situation. If you don't know why somebody is trying so hard to pass you because you don't personally know both them and their situation, then you fail this criteria.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
That would be Mackay, Idaho. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackay,_Idaho Way more cows than people.
One of the reasons lane splitting on motorcycles has not been outlawed in California is because it reduces traffic. I always have to smile, a little bitterly, when I think about it. You see, I've heard the only reason it was allowed in the first place was because motorcycle police officers drove big air cooled bikes in the 60's and 70's, and needed to keep moving in traffic. The bitter part being regular riders on the same bikes didn't warrant notice, but the police officers did. As for clumping, I am not sure why it happens, but I rarely get stuck in clumps. You gotta either travel slightly faster or slightly slower than the clumps, and if the road isn't full of people you'll spend most of the drive blessedly alone.
"On the other hand, what about the annoying guys that just whizz past you in the lane you're trying to get over into while you are trying to get OUT of the fast lane? And they sometimes get really upset, because you just moved into HIS LANE and he had to use his brakes. Ugh! Awful brakes."
No offense but it sounds like either your relaxes are terrible, you do not use your mirrors, or you do not know how to properly drive. Either way, you're being dangerous.
Shouldn't you move over BEFORE they can move over or even get behind you? Also, shouldn't you use your mirrors to see that the person has moved over already before you've started changing lanes?
I'm saying this not to be offensive but more that if you do not think about it and change your driving style (based on what you've said) you might end up dead one day.
One of the primary reasons that traffic jams occur and persist is precisely because people selfishly "jam", deliberately following so closely that it prevents lane movements of any kind, whether those lane movements are reasonable and necessary or not. Traffic jams are a collective exclusionary tactic... sound like familiar human group(think) behavior?
Don't get me started on traffic signals, which are alleged to promote safer crossings than roundabouts, but which "drive" these same rule-breaking drivers to risk everyone's life and limb trying to beat the arbitrary traffic lights, and cause the rest of us to stop thus ruining the efficiency of transit for everyone.
It's not rule-breakers "livening things up" that we need: it's better collective cooperation and less selfishness. A machine doesn't work very well if the individual gears in it don't work in perfect unison. Don't disrespect "The Process"!
I take issue whatever study showed that waiting until the last minute is more efficient. You've got 1 lane of traffic, and for any given speed that lane travels at, you can only get a certain flow rate of cars through that bottleneck, no matter if it's 1 lane feeding it, 2 lanes, or 100 lanes. Well, if you wait until the last minute to merge, you end up with cars tighter together, which means the tolerance for merging is a lot smaller. This would be perfectly fine if everything were computer controlled, but since we've got human with emotions involved, you end up with people having to slow down to merge more carefully. But see, by slowing down, you've just decreased the speed of the lane, so fewer cars are going to make it through in a given time. On the other hand, if you merge early, vehicles will not yet have moved into a tighter formation, so you can more comfortably merge into a single lane without having to slow down as much. You can maintain a higher overall speed, and thus get a higher flow rate through the bottleneck. However, even if you can merge together at the last minute without slowing down, at best you get the same flow rate as if everyone had merged early, so in what way is merging late better?
Of course, we are talking theoretically here. As soon as the one idiot gets greedy and waits until the end, you lose that benefit as everyone has to slow down anyway. However, that's where proper enforcement can come into play. Start ticketing people and they'll learn. Then again, you start ticketing people and that just compounds the problem as people start slowing down..."oh my god, it's a police officer....and he's writing a ticket....slow...down...I've...never...seen...that...before". I guess the only way to make it work right is to go vigilante and start blocking the lane, but then that opens up a whole different can of worms. I guess you can't win.
Also, on this topic, I find it interesting to see how people in different areas behave. Here in Michigan, you will almost always see people waiting until the last minute to merge. A few years ago we went down the the Smokies/Blue Ridge Parkway. On the way back, we were in Virginia (or maybe West Virginia). There was construction at a tunnel, and we were merged into one lane. There was nobody waiting until the last minute to merge. I looked back in the mirror, and for as far as I could see (at least a half mile), there was just a single line of cars and an empty lane.
And since it can be heavy traffic (not quite bumper to bumper, but heavy still) as far as you can see, you know that if you move over, then your going to be the next guy who either gets stuck in the right lane, or dangerously causes 40 cars to hit the brakes.
And your solution is to stay in the left lane and just have traffic back up behind you. Brilliant.
The danger is in trying to move back to the left with such a drastic speed difference.
Well why don't you just stay in the right lane then? Is it because people are traveling slower than you want to? You don't want to be in the "slow" lane, you just want to go slow in the fast lane. Isn't it worth it to safely travel in the slow lane and have a little more patience instead of trying to shave a few minutes off your commute?
Then quite trying to drive 20 mph over the speed limit
I don't drive 20 over, on our freeways here where we have 4+ lanes going each direction with a 65mph limit I stick to 75/80 (e.g.). A lot of other people do too. I'm not exactly alone on this. What irritates me is when I come up on someone going 60 in the fast lane. It's dangerous for them to be doing that. It also doesn't help that half the time they're on their cell phone anyway and are oblivious to anything going on around them. But hey, the left lane is statistically the safest lane so might as well drift over there while I take this call.
Believe it or not, but being a safe, careful driver and going over the speed limit are not mutually exclusive. That highway in particular could easily support a 75mph speed limit like the smaller highways that run outside the city. The danger is when a pack of cars going 5 or 10 over the speed limit comes up on someone going 5 or 10 under. The person posing a danger in that scenario is the person going slower than the flow of traffic while driving in the fast lane.
I keep my eyes on the road, I don't take calls while I drive, I look for other people who don't have a clue what's going on around them, and I get around and put as much distance between them and myself as I can.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
I believe we should drop the speed limit to zero. It's clear that speed costs lives - a speed limit of zero would clear the problem up overnight. And we should be forced to drive three horsepower rubber cars with a planter in the back.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
But a damned traffic jam slowed it down!!
While riding a motorcycle, I once had an idiot work real hard to get in front of me, then immediately slam on the brakes to make a right turn...
The perfect commuting vehicle around here... a 1986 HD pickup truck with a big smelly diesel, plenty of dents and rust over a camouflage paint job, and perhaps the logos of some other makes of cars spray painted on the drivers side door just in case anyone misses the point. Oh, and wear a full face helmet while driving your truck. Gets a lot of right-of-way!
"Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
Well, in Germany it would be against the law to change early. It has been shown that driving till the end, and then merging as "one from the left lane, one from the right lane" is the most efficient way to handle ending lanes. Therefore the law demands that. It's called "Reissverschlussverfahren" ("zipper procedure").
Now that is an evil word.
Cop: I charge you 20 Euros for violation of the ... REISSVERSCHLUSSVERFAHREN!
Well said. I would add the caveat that "actually passing someone" means doing so in a reasonably short time. If you are unwilling or unable to do more than inch past the car in front at a glacial pace you should suck it up and wait for a break in traffic in the passing lane before attempting to do so. This goes treble for lorries/semis on long uphill sections with only 2 lanes each way!
"Algebraical symbols are used when you don't know what you are talking about" - BCS
I drive at 85 miles per hour. If someone behind me wants to do 90, I move over.
If you're in the passing lane when there is no car to pass for miles, then you are a jerk, no matter what the law is.
In the past that has inspired me to even bigger jerkdom. I admit that at least five times I have passed on the right, moved left and slooooowly let my speed fall to 55 or less. This really pisses them off.
When they finally move right, I hammer it and zoom off at 85, content they have possibly learned something. Or at least it made me feel vindictive and fulfilled. Whatever.
In Bangalore its the other way round. If one person breaks the rule then it triggers a chain reaction and before you can do something you end up in a deadlock. The problem is that the traffic system is stretched to the limit. Some of the roads are a nightmare to drive.
Got a ticket for doing 47 in a 45 zone.
The Judge dismissed it, told me to have a nice day & dismissed me, then "had a talk" with the ticketing officer about "wasting [his] time".
If it's in 5MPH of the posted limit, chances are it's in the "margin for error" realm of the machine the cop is using to measure your speed.
Judges don't like it when ANYONE wastes their time, but ESPECIALLY when it's a cop who's supposed to know better.
Around here, there is a notable difference in quality of the road surface between the lanes, because there are plenty of heavy load trucks. I actually do drive in the passing lane on an empty highway just to save on shocks maintenance costs.
You must move to the right hand lane for faster moving traffic (regardless of speed) or you get a ticket for obstructing the flow of traffic.
So which lane should I choose if I'm in a slow-moving vehicle and I want to turn left?
The article is about jurisdictions that drive on the right: Sweden, Alberta (Canada), Paris (France). If you want to discuss the UK or other jurisdictions that drive on the left, you'll have to mentally mirror the examples first.
Do I really need to drive two hours a day to sit inside a Baltimore office and type code all day? I can do the exact-same work at home.
Unless your employer is subject to third party restrictions against telecommuting. Nintendo, for instance, is known for its disapproval of authorized developers working out of home offices. I would imagine that this is common among organizations that deal in classified or otherwise sensitive information.
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them.
Where I come from, that would be a line of people preparing to turn left.
well, he's wrong, but then his beliefs are his own business. Can't please everyone. Last I checked, I was talking about being the responsible party.
No, I am not at all wrong. You yourself stated that as a fact. That was your assertion and something that you were bragging about. Trying to deny that now is both stupid and deeply dishonest.
You were not talking about being the responsible party. You were talking about going out of your way to fuck over other drivers because their frustration amuses you.
Since you do not have the foggiest idea what the motivations of the other party are before deciding to fuck them over you are a bad person. It really is that simple. It sucks for everyone else that you don't possess even the most basic common sense or basic human decency which is all it would take a healthy person to realise that, but pretending the facts aren't what they are by your own admission is just stupid.
It's not up to you to decide whether or not somebody else's emergency is important enough. It's your responsibility to stay the fuck out of people's way and *not* be an asshole because you find that amusing. You don't have the right to make those decisions for others. When you attempt to usurp that authority over others, you grant them the right to decide whether or not you live or die. That is the oldest deal in the history of humanity and every struggle against every tyrant is premised on that fact.
Incorrect logic.
On your part, not mine.
Had he known that you were trying to save the life of your loved one, and he'd acted the same, that would be correct.
Wrong. Had he known *for a fact* that it was not the case that a life was on the line then he'd still be an asshole, but his crime would be less egregious. It doesn't make it ok to actively be an asshole just because you're ignorant of the situation.
He was just being thoughtless, not malicious/evil.
Wrong again. He was *intentionally* fucking over other drivers and preventing them from keeping up with the flow of traffic because being an asshole amuses him. That was his statement. That is malicious by definition. Evil too in my book, but that term isn't well defined. Actively hurting others without gaining any benefit for yourself just for the intended purpose of being an asshole to people meets it in my book though. Had his intentionally malicious evil led to the death of an innocent person, then his execution would be completely justified. That doesn't mean that if he doesn't kill somebody with his childish asshattery that it magically becomes OK. It is never ok to act like that under any circumstances.
Thoughtless would be if he was daydreaming, ended up in the passing lane without consciously noticing and then when somebody asks him to get out of the way he does and apologises. That's thoughtless. What he did took active thought according to him. His intent was to fuck over other people for his amusement. Why you would even bother trying to defend the type of scum who routinely does that shit is a question you should be asking yourself. The answer to that will say a lot about you.
I drive the speed limit or perhaps 5 under, and I think I have the same effect. People tend to get into clumps going 5 over, 10 over, etc, and move as a lump down all the lanes. When they come up behind me, they're forced to move over and pass, and I think the turbulent flow tends to break things up and allow people to resort themselves into different speed groups.
Thanks for the link, it's a great article. It does seem to show however, that the 'move over' camp is in the majority even though a few states rule the other way, as does this compilation of rules linked in the article: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html. Based on the color code of that list, I'm guessing the guy who made it thinks driving the speed limit in the left lane is a bad idea. I tend to agree, but my OCD side really dislikes the idea of having to move over to allow somebody else to break the law. Therefore, I sort of like the 'you can do the speed limit in the left lane' idea, but only as a way to pressure governments to raise the speed limit. Unfortunately, it really doesn't work that way.
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
I find it an interesting metric of slashdot readership that every single complaint involves this "omighod must stay with the herd" behaviour resulting in multiple lanes being 'blocke'd on the freeway.
Not one comment (at least that I saw, and I read most of 'em) mentions the much more hazardous problem of passing on two-lane roads, where you go to pass someone and they speed up to match you WHILE YOU ARE IN THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC'S LANE.
Again, judging from my neighbour's behaviour, this is usually unconscious (hardwired stick-with-the-herd), not just being an asshole.
====
You trust your fellow man. In fact, you trust him with your very life.
Don't think so?? You drive on two-lane roads, don't you??
Er, well, judging from the comment chain as remarked above... maybe not.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
If switching lanes is a dangerous manuever for you, perhaps you need to take public transportation or hire a driver. I bet you avoid the right hand lanes as well to avoid merging. If you're unable to match the skills of the general population of drivers please stop increasing my risk of delays and accidents by your subpar driving abilities.