Slashdot Mirror


Engineers: Traffic Studies Use Simulation Software, Not Lane Closings

Lucas123 writes "The so-called 'traffic study' that closed New Jersey access lanes on the heavily traveled George Washington Bridge last September has left engineers scratching their heads, because in modern America, simulation software is used instead of closing down lanes. One of the best sources for simulation data are video camera systems that use software to count vehicles on roadways. Traffic studies use microscopic traffic simulations to create virtual environments that can model driver behavior to road changes with exacting detail. Instead, the Port Authority, under Gov. Chris Christie, shut down two of the three access lanes for four days last September from Fort Lee to the George Washington Bridge without warning the public, citing a 'traffic study.' 'I would be pretty confident that if we knew exactly which lanes are closed we could replicate that, and it would show exactly how bad the backups are going to be,' said Lorenzo Rotoli, an engineer and vice president at Fisher Associates, a civil engineering firm in New York that works on roads, bridges and signal systems."

53 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. In other words ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative

    This was a spiteful and petty act of retribution, pretty much much as reported already.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:In other words ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Exactly. Fuck West Virginia.

    2. Re:In other words ... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't even understand this story. The smoking gun has already been found, reported, and Jon Stewart did a whole send-up of it last week.

      Why would anybody still be trying to figure out if the attempted cover-up was bogus or not?

      I realize the guy has aspirations for power, but if he were successful we can be confident he'd appoint the same kind of viscous, vindictive, psychopathic cronies who would do similar things at his behest (irrespective of whether he know about this incident). That's not a tradition we can afford to continue in Washington.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:In other words ... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

      I for one am shocked, shocked, to hear of political corruption in New Jersey.

    4. Re:In other words ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I must confess, unless it's just to get page hits, or to demonstrate that nobody could plausibly claim to have really been doing a traffic study ... I find myself asking the same question.

      However, in modern politics, you don't refute the facts, you provide your own 'facts' and talk really loud about something else.

      Maybe this is just a more reasoned attempt to short circuit that.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:In other words ... by daremonai · · Score: 4, Funny

      Geography is sooo overrated.

    6. Re:In other words ... by nbauman · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't even understand this story. The smoking gun has already been found, reported, and Jon Stewart did a whole send-up of it last week.

      Why would anybody still be trying to figure out if the attempted cover-up was bogus or not?

      Slashdot got the mathematical modeling angle.

    7. Re:In other words ... by bobbied · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good luck getting elected now ya meathead. Rand Paul can run circles around this guy.

      Rand Paul? Ok, you are one of those people. Cruz has more name recognition and you won't find many confused Rand with Ron (his father) which is a serious problem because Ron is NUTS.

      About Christie, All I can say is it really sucks being the perceived "front runner" because *everybody* is gunning for you. It's easier to fund raise, but at three years out you'd rather not draw such attention and fund raising is not exactly in full swing yet. Nobody would care about a "traffic study" if he was #3 or #4 on the list of contenders.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    8. Re:In other words ... by ArtForz · · Score: 3, Funny

      Viscous cronies? So... they're really thick?

    9. Re:In other words ... by icebike · · Score: 2

      I don't even understand this story. The smoking gun has already been found, reported, and Jon Stewart did a whole send-up of it last week.
        That's not a tradition we can afford to continue in Washington.

      Well, lets wait till the proof is in before we assume it wasn't an action taken by some over-zealous underling, instead of Christie himself.

      After all, the same people rushing to condemn Christie gleefully accept the same excuse from Obama, when he claims he didn't know, and wasn't told.

      What I want to know, is why any state's DOT would take orders like that EVEN if they thought it came from the Governor himself.
      Most rational state governments do not allow the Governor to micro-manage road and lane closures, for non-emergency reasons, and when there is a real emergency need, the DOT is usually well ahead of the elected officials.

      Why does New Jersey allow a governor to make that call?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    10. Re:In other words ... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Informative

      The smoking gun has already been found,

      Not according to Fox. On their opening broadcast when the initial emails were released, the first words out of the talking head's mouth was (as near as I can remember), "There was no smoking gun found in the documents released today about the New Jersey bridge shutdown."

      Why would anybody still be trying to figure out if the attempted cover-up was bogus or not?

      Again, going back to Fox, they're still wondering why people are so enamored with this story. After the first day they essentially dropped all coverage except for a tiny blurb along the right side of their web page, and then only to keep wondering why the media was so focused on this event.

      I realize using Fox as a reference is akin to using the National Enquirer, but I'm just answering your questions.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    11. Re:In other words ... by SpankiMonki · · Score: 5, Informative

      What I want to know, is why any state's DOT would take orders like that EVEN if they thought it came from the Governor himself. Most rational state governments do not allow the Governor to micro-manage road and lane closures, for non-emergency reasons, and when there is a real emergency need, the DOT is usually well ahead of the elected officials.

      Why does New Jersey allow a governor to make that call?

      NY and NJ DOTs have nothing to do with it. The GWB is run by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey which separate from the state governments. The only reason the NJ governor's office was able to pull this off was because of their appointees & other cronies inside the PANYNJ.

    12. Re:In other words ... by ShaunC · · Score: 3, Informative

      For what it's worth, I was watching CNN coverage last night (Piers Morgan, Anderson Cooper) and both had their share of panelists who were also saying there is no smoking gun. I haven't had time yet to look at today's developments, but I haven't seen anything that directly implicates Governor Christie. He just comes out looking incompetent for not knowing what his top aides were up to, which isn't much better.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    13. Re:In other words ... by braeldiil · · Score: 4, Informative

      And this is a perfect example of how, if you repeat your false story enough times, people will believe it. The IRS office in question flagged groups from all over the political spectrum to determine if they were engaging in political activities that would prevent them from being tax exempt charities. Yes, they used "Tea Party" as a flag for further investigation, but they also used "Occupy". They were attempting to enforce the law passed by Congress, albeit in a very bad, possibly illegal way. For the record, they started these investigations after specific requests from Congress to make sure these nonprofits weren't breaking the law. But the House very carefully tailored their requests to make it appear that only conservative groups were targeted, and attempted to supress testimony that demonstrated groups from all over the spectrum were affected. Once the full testimony transcripts were released, the press realized there wasn't really much of a story and mostly dropped it. But low-information voters like you never bothered to follow the story to its end.

    14. Re:In other words ... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2, Informative

      And notably, every single conservative political group eventually got their tax exempt status, even before the "scandal" broke, while at least a few liberal groups got denied, in the end.

      I think we can all dream of a world where all those groups got denied the ability to influence our elections while not paying taxes, but no luck yet.

    15. Re:In other words ... by xevioso · · Score: 2

      Just like Christie.

    16. Re:In other words ... by JustOK · · Score: 4, Funny

      NOT TRUE! The study of rocks is very critical.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    17. Re:In other words ... by Entropius · · Score: 2

      Given that the governments in New York and New Jersey don't even give lip service to actually having the best interests of the people at heart, shouldn't the ownership of critical infrastructure, held in trust for the people, be in the hands of someone else?

    18. Re:In other words ... by Entropius · · Score: 2

      Didn't Christie directly say it was a traffic study? Regardless of whether he ordered it or not (abuse of power), he's now engaged in lying and obstruction of justice.

    19. Re:In other words ... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So, you're saying that the organizations were illegally dedicated to political purposes, in spite of their application for tax exemption?

      I don't get the logic here... are you trying to say how unfair it was to scrutinize people for a felony so they couldn't commit a felony?

    20. Re:In other words ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, liberal and conservative groups were treated differently. Liberal groups could be approved at field offices, while conservative groups were to be sent to group 7822 in DC for further screening. Once there, they were held for years until the election was safely over. There is substantial statistical evidence that this affected the result of the 2012 election (turnout was particularly low among the Tea Party demographic--low enough to swing results in several key states). There is also video evidence (in the form of anti-Citizens United diatribes) that the President was likely to be OK with it. Finally, this scandal and the related scandal of the disclosure by the IRS of confidential donor lists, are being investigated by an Obama donor. And no charges will be brought. And nobody lost their job.

    21. Re:In other words ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, we demand some lip service!

    22. Re:In other words ... by ttucker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I assume this is a evidence substantiated sub-theory, rather than absurdly shifted goalposts when reality shows to be the opposite of paranoid claims. Right?

      Nobody is shifting the goalposts, besides you. The original complaint was that the IRS delayed the applications, such that the groups could not participate in the political debate leading to the 2012 US presidential election. The groups in fact were not able to participate. Nobody gives a shit, really, whether they were granted the status afterwards... it is a superfluous detail, only further supporting the original thesis.

    23. Re:In other words ... by SpankiMonki · · Score: 4, Informative

      That being said, can you provide links for your version of this information?

      Here.

      ...and here.

      ...and here.

    24. Re:In other words ... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued. Although the processing of some applications with potential significant political campaign intervention was started soon after receipt, no work was completed on the majority of these applications for 13 months.... For the 296 total political campaign intervention applications [reviewed in the audit] as of December 17, 2012, 108 had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied.

      treasury.gov

    25. Re:In other words ... by DexterIsADog · · Score: 2

      The original complaint was that the IRS delayed the applications, such that the groups could not participate in the political debate leading to the 2012 US presidential election. The groups in fact were not able to participate.

      This garbage is getting tiresome. NO ONE prevented those groups from participating, not even a little bit. Their COMPLAINT (which is false) was that they couldn't fund their activities on MY dime as bogus tax exempt groups.

      I'm tired of this wah, wah, wah, when not only is the actual complaint a lie, the lie is compounded by posts like yours which claim something even farther from the truth.

    26. Re:In other words ... by runningduck · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So your grievance is that groups which should not qualify for the tax status if they are political were delayed with their participating in the political debate?

      --
      -rd
    27. Re:In other words ... by Mashdar · · Score: 2

      To be fair, the law states that the "primary purpose" of the group cannot be political, which is generally been interpreted as >50% of financial resources going to "non-political" action, whatever that means. It sounded like someone started doing database queries for words they thought were relevant for screening the database. Then someone else screamed that querying the database was unconstitutional.

  2. It was a traffic study by viperidaenz · · Score: 3, Funny

    He was studying how playing traffic god would impact his political career

    1. Re:It was a traffic study by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Funny

      He was studying how playing traffic god would impact his political career

      There really needs to be an Android game called "traffic god".

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:It was a traffic study by daremonai · · Score: 4, Informative
  3. Re:duh by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real question is whether it ordered by a rogue official(s), or the governor himself. If information comes out that the governor was involved then he just lost himself a chance at being president.

    No, the real question is, has politics stooped so low that political staff (and possibly politicians) feel entitled to act like petulant little children and expect to get away with it?

    And, if so, why is society prepared to live with their politicians and staff acting like such douchebags?

    I don't care what political stripe you are, fucking with the traffic patterns to seek retribution against a political foe makes you an asshole.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  4. needs work by Cardoor · · Score: 2

    Christie is going to have to practice his lying skills if he wants to seriously be a contender for president. I mean, come on.. .Clinton.. the bushes.. Obama.. they gotta be looking at him as total j.v.

  5. News for Nerds? by CubicleZombie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or is this just because Christie is a republican. 2016 is starting early around here.

    The democrat governor of MY state closed the DMVs in all the districts that voted in republican delegates. Didn't make the news at all. And now he's a U.S. Senator.

    --
    :wq
    1. Re: News for Nerds? by CubicleZombie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here's a citation.

      It's a pretty big hassle when you have to drive an hour away and stand in line for four hours to renew your drivers license. Especially when it's just because you had the nerve to vote against the governor's party.

      After that, he turned the Virginia side of the D.C. Beltway into a foreign owned toll road. Then he ran a dirty smear campaign for Senate and won by convincing the general public that his opponent was trying to ban the birth control pill (a lie).

      --
      :wq
    2. Re: News for Nerds? by coinreturn · · Score: 2

      11 years ago and apparently it did make the news, as shown in the link you provided.

    3. Re: News for Nerds? by babydog · · Score: 5, Informative

      As the linked-to article indicates, because most districts in VA were Republican, any DMV closings made on the basis of cost and number of customers served had to affect Republicans. For what it's worth, my local non-Republican-serving Arlington DMV office was also closed, and Arlington customers had to go stand in the massive line in Tysons. (I think the story was: immigrants could acquire a VA drivers license without proof of legal residency relatively easily up until a certain point after 9/11. The Tysons office was swamped until that and other things changed.)

    4. Re: News for Nerds? by alen · · Score: 2

      if demographics is any guide, the republican areas are the most sparsely populated parts of the state and should have been the first ones to be closed. and the ones in the more populated areas left open

    5. Re: News for Nerds? by byennie · · Score: 2

      Riggghhhht. Warner will run for president and nobody will dig out the massive scandal that you have uncovered. I'm willing to accept that there are slimeballs on both sides. I am not willing to accept that one side will escape media scrutiny.

    6. Re: News for Nerds? by dcollins · · Score: 2

      LOL. Thank you for confirming that you're totally delusion (and saving me from reading any of your other links/articles). Mark Warner will be president? He was a front runner in 2008?

      (a) I'm a political junkie and I've never heard of this guy before today. (b) Mark Warner did not even RUN for president in 2008. (c) Neither did he make the cut for vice-presidential candidate. (d) Pssst, let me to introduce you to someone named Clinton.

      "In 2006 he was widely expected to pursue the Democratic nomination in the 2008 U.S. presidential elections; however, he announced in October 2006 that he would not run, citing a desire not to disrupt his family life. Warner was considered to be a potential vice presidential candidate, but upon receiving the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate, he announced that he 'will not accept any other opportunity.'"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Warner

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  6. Re:duh by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem is that the reasoning ability is low and the length of memory is short.

    The same conundrum can be seen in Florida's governor, Rick Scott. He presided over a company involved in what was to that time the biggest Medicare fraud in U.S. history. He was either incompetent or a full fledged criminal. And what happens... people in Florida made his governor.

    If people thought through things I would agree, but come vote type old Fat Farmer Joe is going to pull the lever marked "Republican Straight Ticket" because he bases all his votes on political stereotype or talking points. The fact that we have a malice vs incompetence conundrum is not going to matter to Farmer Joe because he's late for Hee-Haw.

  7. Re:duh by nbauman · · Score: 2

    The real question is whether it ordered by a rogue official(s), or the governor himself. If information comes out that the governor was involved then he just lost himself a chance at being president.

    If Bush won, anybody can be president.

  8. Re:duh by MaWeiTao · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, the real question is, has politics stooped so low that political staff (and possibly politicians) feel entitled to act like petulant little children and expect to get away with it?

    This question has long since been answered. Anyone who follows local politics knows that this sort of thing is a daily occurrence. The difference is that most of these politicians don't have aspirations of being president, they just want all the perks and kickbacks that come with the position. So none of it ever gets the attention it deserves.

    If you're stuck in a city or town that has voted in the same party for decades then there's corruption and nepotism on a level you can't even imagine. So the fact that it tricks up to state level isn't surprising at all. Sometimes it makes it all the way up to Federal government, but those guys are operating on a whole other level.

  9. Actual scientific traffic sim by gentryx · · Score: 2

    For the curious: here is a link to Sumo, which is a real, scientific traffic simulation software developed by the DLR in Germany.

    --
    Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
  10. Re:duh by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    Well, yeah, that's not really the fault of the people. Game theory dictates that the kind of electoral system we have in the US pushes towards large, dissimilar alliances being able to capitalize on division of others into smaller groups. Political parties evolve and reproduce like a living thing, and success at elections drives that meme reproduction.

    If you burned the two existing parties to the ground, made a law that said "you can't identify as democrat/republican, liberal/conservative, whatever" and somehow prevented the two from rising from the ashes you might get 2 different parties down the line, but there'd still be basically 2 parties.

    It's a constitutional issue, and not a human one.

  11. Oh look by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Another reason to talk about the "Bridgegate" scandal instead of, I dunno, real news like Obamacare, unemployment, our moribund economy, the ongoing blunders in foreign policy, NSA surveillance, etc.

    Please, let's talk about Chris Christie some more.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Oh look by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What the hell are you talking about? Every news outlet panned the roll out obamacare, Obama had a couple of press conferences, there are constant stories about obamacare all the time. Actually I wish they will talk more about Obamacare, because now the site has turned around, and actual beneficiaries are there to talk to. Some 10 million of them. 3 million age less than 26 sticking on to parents plans, 2.2 million private enrolees and some 4.2 million medicaid expansion. Imagine where it would be if it got bit of cooperation from the Republicans.

      Unemployment is a constant news story. It keeps coming up, most recently in the disappointing job numbers for Dec 2013. Moribund economy is another constant news item. NSA surveillance is a constant news item. Foreign policy, Syria, Israel, Egypt constantly in the news.

      Just come out of the echo chamber to realize how much Democrats have been trashed by the press.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  12. Re:duh by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The real question is whether it ordered by a rogue official(s), or the governor himself. If information comes out that the governor was involved then he just lost himself a chance at being president.

    No, the real question is, has politics stooped so low that political staff (and possibly politicians) feel entitled to act like petulant little children and expect to get away with it?

    Yes it has. What do you think the IRS scandal was/is? At the very best the IRS scandal was almost exactly what Christie claims his "traffic study" was. Some appointed underling did something for the political advantage of their appointer in order to try and sway an election. Of course the person in charge "didn't know" and was "surprised to learn" that his appointee did it. I call it plausible deniability because it's very likely they actually didn't know, they just appointed people who just instinctively do stuff like this.

    And, if so, why is society prepared to live with their politicians and staff acting like such douchebags?

    I don't care what political stripe you are,

    And slow rolling the tax approval of rival political groups is exactly the same kind of problem, albeit somehow more direct if you ask me. There is much to deride on both sides and the accepted political tactics they use.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  13. Re:Anonymous Coward by icebike · · Score: 2

    Those are called "Laps"

    Either way it is something Christie has never done.

    Christie probably hasn't seen his lap (or anything in it) since the 6th grade.

    ---Ok, mean spirited, but I couldn't resist.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  14. Ha ha ha by no-body · · Score: 2

    Cristie would be even more toast than he is anyhow.
    Seems goons like that are attracted to offices he got in which brings to mind why perhaps the NSA gets it's way because they have so much stuff to smear anyone and use that as leverage to get to play their little boys power games.

  15. Ahh, the ignorance is rampant in this thread. by nobuddy · · Score: 2

    To quote another poster:

    And this is a perfect example of how, if you repeat your false story enough times, people will believe it. The IRS office in question flagged groups from all over the political spectrum to determine if they were engaging in political activities that would prevent them from being tax exempt charities. Yes, they used "Tea Party" as a flag for further investigation, but they also used "Occupy". They were attempting to enforce the law passed by Congress, albeit in a very bad, possibly illegal way. For the record, they started these investigations after specific requests from Congress to make sure these nonprofits weren't breaking the law. But the House very carefully tailored their requests to make it appear that only conservative groups were targeted, and attempted to supress testimony that demonstrated groups from all over the spectrum were affected. Once the full testimony transcripts were released, the press realized there wasn't really much of a story and mostly dropped it. But low-information voters like you never bothered to follow the story to its end.

  16. Re:duh by andydread · · Score: 2, Informative

    Except in the IRS scandal the IRS wasn't only targeting conservative groups like the talk-radio circuit would have you believe. They were equally targeting liberal groups filing tax exempt status while going about with political activites. In other words Fox and talk-radio friends left off the important fact that they were targeting all political activists both liberal and conservative that were filing for 501C4 status and then doing political activism. Apparently that is against the law.

  17. Re:I have no idea what this story is about. by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 2

    Considering there are only three roads into Manhattan (many jobs) from Jersey (many residents), it is a big deal when someone intentionally fouls up the already terrible rush hour traffic on one of them.

    It's also somewhat comical because this same Governor single handedly scuttled a shovel ready (and mostly paid for) project to build a new rail tunnel into Manhattan... it's almost like he wants to encourage residents to move to the same state they're employed in, which would *not* work out for Jersey at all...