Slashdot Mirror


NYC Asks Google Maps For Fewer Left Turns

An anonymous reader writes: Members of the New York City Council have sent a letter to Google asking that its Maps navigation system provide users an option to "reduce left turns." Pedestrian safety is the issue they're trying to improve. In the U.S., a quarter of all accidents involving pedestrians happen while a vehicle is making a left turn. "The first cause of death for New York City children under 13 is not gangs, it's not poverty, not violence. It's being hit by cars and trucks. This is the time for the city to reach out to the private sector, so they can help us to provide information to drivers about where you should avoid making left turns." The council members are also asking for an option that would let truckers stay on known truck routes, hoping that would prevent the problems that arise when big-rigs wander onto streets not large enough to safely accommodate them.

65 of 363 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is obviously a nanny state act by the same government that forced everyone to drink less soda and is run by the SJWs that are ruining video games like Ellen Pao and Obama.

    Holy crap, I just hit submit and it's already at +5 Insightful. And you've been modded to -1 Troll already. It's an AI! There are no moderators really modding these things!

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. Re:or... by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they could just put up "no left turn" signs

    It takes money to order and install such signs. Then those requirements impede profit later on, as well. That plan won't fly. Instead they spent a few days' worth of city council time writing a letter to ask someone else to provide an optional work-around.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  3. Seems Reasonable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Making a request like this seems very reasonable and hopefully Google will be able to improve their service in this regard.

    1. Re:Seems Reasonable by Forgefather · · Score: 2

      Honestly this seems like perfectly reasonable user feedback concerning a use case that was not considered by the developers. It is the natural process of software development.

      The addition fewer left turns may also have a help on traffic for NY. Quite often traffic will pile up in turn lanes on two way streets until the turning traffic blocks the normal lanes. If there are more right turns it could prevent buildup of traffic at red lights.

      Also another change worth considering in large cities: have an option to set the destination of your directions to the nearest available public parking. It is quite frustrating whenever you find the place you want to be only to discover that you will have to circle the blocks looking for a place to park.

      --
      "There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics"
    2. Re:Seems Reasonable by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Honestly this seems like perfectly reasonable user feedback concerning a use case that was not considered by the developers.

      Honestly it seems goddamned retarded that the software doesn't already try to optimize away left turns. Everyone and their mother knows, for example, that UPS does this. They do it to save fuel, but it also improves safety.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Seems Reasonable by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since this isn't about absolutely avoiding left turns, but reducing the number, you could just count every right turn as a 10 second penalty, and every left turn as a 30 second penalty, and go on calculating the fastest route.

  4. if you ask a geek by eexaa · · Score: 3, Funny

    Left turn = three right turns. Three times safer, right?

    1. Re:if you ask a geek by JcMorin · · Score: 2

      If a left turn have 10 times more chances to hit someone, turning 3 times on the right would still be a lots safer. My best guess is that a turn left is more like 100 times more dangerous.

    2. Re:if you ask a geek by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      Don't know about safer, but I know a lot of places where trying to make a left hand turn can be a major pain in the ass ... I was at a traffic light not so long ago that had two left turning lanes, with room for about 20 cars in each lane.

      The advanced left turn gave enough room for about 3 cars from each lane to get through the intersection before the light changed -- assuming the front-most car stomped on it as soon as the light changed. Which left a lot of cars still not through the intersection.

      Don't know if it was a time of day thing which wasn't working, or what. But it was annoying as hell ... it could literally take 20 minutes to get through.

      But people have been avoiding left hand turns in many places for quite some time.

      Hell, I've been through a few places where there are no left turning lanes, so if someone is trying to turn left traffic grinds to a halt.

      I can only imagine in a city like New York this is even worse, and then racing to make the left and not seeing a pedestrian could be a huge deal.

      There's been several times where I'd like to have my navigation unit let me select this. Left turns in crowded cities can be a royal nuisance.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:if you ask a geek by tomhath · · Score: 2

      I expect what the city wants is something like choosing between these two routes:

      1) Proceed one block west to Main and turn right, go two blocks and turn left onto Third

      2) Proceed two blocks west to Oak Street and turn right, go two blocks and turn right onto Third.

      Think about it; same number of turns, you end up in the same place. But #2 trades driving an extra half block to eliminate the left turn. If I know the streets I often make that choice myself, especially if I know the destination will be another right turn with option 2 versus another left with option 1

    4. Re:if you ask a geek by bledri · · Score: 3, Informative

      Left turn = three right turns. Three times safer, right?

      If you ask a statistician you'll discover that it's not only safer, but it's also more efficient because less time is spend making complete stops and idling at lights. This is why UPS minimizes left turns.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
  5. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by damn_registrars · · Score: 2, Funny

    Had you stopped after your first line you'd be moderated "insightful". Instead you'll like be moderated "funny". I expect my second line may have moved my comment out of "troll" and into "funny" as well, though slashdot users with moderator points are not renowned for having a sense of humor about themselves.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  6. Re:or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sometimes a left turn is necessary. Having Google maps put a higher cost in the algorithm for left turns, the system can then determine better if a left turn should be made or three rights. It isn't about eliminating them entirely (as it isn't practical to do so), it is about reducing.

  7. Fewer left turns? by xenog · · Score: 3, Funny

    I live in Ireland, you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:Fewer left turns? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 2

      Why has no one pointed out that you drive on the wrong side of the road? What is /. coming to?

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    2. Re:Fewer left turns? by tepples · · Score: 2

      In that case, feel free to respond to a cultural translation: "Dublin Asks Google Maps For Fewer Right Turns"

      (Generated from template: "$large_city Asks Google Maps For Fewer $driving_opposite_side Turns")

    3. Re:Fewer left turns? by Bongo · · Score: 2

      If you think a left turn causes carnage, just imagine what driving on the wrong side of the read altogether does.

  8. It works for UPS. by RevWaldo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apparently it also reduces fuel consumption and saves time

    http://compass.ups.com/UPS-dri...

    .

    1. Re:It works for UPS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      UPS has the advantage that they don't want to go to a specific target, but drive past multiple targets. It's quite likely that they don't substitude 3 right turns for each left turn they eliminate, but significantly less on average.

  9. NASCAR by Gizan · · Score: 2

    But i wanted to keep turning left in my stock car!!!! We dont make right turns

  10. "Truckers" should use commercial solutions by acoustix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Truckers shouldn't use google maps anyway - they don't provide legal truck routes. There are other applications out there like ALK PC Miler that provides truck routes based on verified truck routes, height and weight limits, etc.

    I'm not sure that Google wants to get into that game, at least not providing a free product.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    1. Re:"Truckers" should use commercial solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually Yes they do, there is a setting for Class A trucks with height & weight restrictions restrictions

      Just do a "google maps class A truck setting", BAM! ... there is your recalculated route

  11. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait, Ellen Pao and Obama are video games?

  12. Why don't apps learn? by barlevg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are certain roads I prefer to take and others I prefer to avoid, certain maneuvers I prefer to make and others I dislike. Example: especially if I'm navigating someplace unfamiliar, I'd much rather take the "least complicated" route that involves the fewest turns, especially if the time saving is less than 15 minutes.

    Google Maps tracks this, both if I'm putting together the route on the computer (for printing out and taking with me) or if I'm actually navigating. And yet its suggested directions never change. It seems like there'd be MORE than enough data accumulated in a relatively small number of drives for GMaps (or Waze, is after all owned by Google, or whatever) to notice "Ah, this person hates taking non-protected left turns," or, "this person will not take the beltway for any more than a half-hour's time savings," and to adjust the directions it gives accordingly. They personalize search results. Why not directions?

    1. Re:Why don't apps learn? by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      They personalize search results. Why not directions?

      They're too busy figuring out the next way to shit up the maps interface with more idiotic changes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. One seems reasonable by afidel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The request for right turn optimized routes seems reasonable, but the truck route seems stupid to me. If you're operating a large truck you should be using truck optimized commercial software, not freaking Google Maps. There are all sorts of things like bridge height, earlier lane alignment alerts (it takes a LOT longer to get an opening big enough for a big rig), hazmat restrictions, etc that the commercial packages take into account that google maps is unlikely to ever add so giving a truck route option seems like it would give drivers a false sense that google maps is an acceptable alternative to what they should really be using.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  14. As a motorcyclist... by TFlan91 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a motorcyclist, I avoid left turns like the plague.

    Not for safety reasons, but because I don't want to sit there for 15 minutes waiting for a car that weighs enough to pull up behind me to trigger the lights to turn green.

    We waste so much of our lives waiting at red lights its baffling!

    </semi-tangent>

    1. Re:As a motorcyclist... by OzPeter · · Score: 2

      Not for safety reasons, but because I don't want to sit there for 15 minutes waiting for a car that weighs enough to pull up behind me to trigger the lights to turn green.

      20 or 30 years ago I asked a cop in Australia about what should I do when the lights don't respond to a motorcycle. His reply was that if you are sitting there for so long then you can consider the light to be defective and you can proceed with caution. However this was before the widespread introduction of red light cameras and I never put it to the test.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  15. The solution... by Krymzn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Switch to driving on the left.

  16. Why do this? by gsslay · · Score: 2

    Could someone explain for the non-Americans why it is possible to have cars turning left at a green light, at the same time as pedestrians crossing the road have a green light? What was the thinking behind this? And why is the solution not just to stop this happening?

    1. Re: Why do this? by jandrese · · Score: 2

      It's almost impossible to drive across London though. New York City traffic is not great, but you at least get where you need to go.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    2. Re: Why do this? by itsdapead · · Score: 2

      It's almost impossible to drive across London though. New York City traffic is not great, but you at least get where you need to go.

      I don't think that's because of the traffic lights. I think that's because of road layouts dictated by stone-age goat-tracks, mediaeval land disputes, rivers that aren't there any more and WWII ending before the Germans had time to build enough V2s. And London's nothing compared to some other European cities.

      OTOH, central London's small enough to walk across.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  17. Better yet... by c · · Score: 4, Funny

    NYC should just ask Google to track children in real-time and let drivers know when one is nearby. And especially flag the ones who aren't being watched by an adult; they're way more likely to play in traffic.

    Pervasive surveillance... it's for the children!

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  18. numbers by corando · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1/4th of accidents occur when going in 1 of 4 directions.... imagine that :)

  19. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's Political Correctness gone mad!

    BTW, did you notice this story is literally NYC asking Google Maps to have a leftward bias?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  20. Pedestrian cycle! by Xenious · · Score: 2

    We could add a pedestrian cycle to all stop lights which halts all traffic and lets people walk in all four directions at once. ;)

    --
    -Xen
  21. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I fail to see how anyone could construe offering an additional option, rather than constraining people to that option, is acting like a nanny state. Most especially since it's simply a friendly request, not a law, so it's up to google to decide if the feature offers value to their customers or not.

    Heck, I'd expect the right wing to be all over this as an example of how private companies and government can work together for mutual advancement.

  22. Re:Big truck != Big company by afidel · · Score: 2

    Wait, you can buy a six figure truck, but $300 is too much to spend to have appropriate mapping?!? That's a complete BS excuse. Heck, I imagine one fine for having a truck on a route that doesn't allow them is enough to pay for the unit. Also I bet the fuel price search could save more in a month than the unit costs.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  23. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    BTW, did you notice this story is literally NYC asking Google Maps to have a leftward bias?

    No, but I did notice the exact opposite of that.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  24. Stop traffic when letting pedestrians cross by iTrawl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I live in the UK. Here, traffic is stopped entirely across the intersection and pedestrians are allowed to use all the crossings. There's no crossing when any side of the intersection has a green light for cars.

    After living in the UK for so long, I went to visit a friend in Germany and it took me by surprise when after making a left turn there was a pedestrian crossing the road... and he had a green light too.

    I find the idea of letting both traffic and pedestrians on the road at the same time stupid and irresponsible.

    --
    "Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
  25. Re:Waiting for that first "Nanny state" comment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Germany to go left, you take the *Third Right*

  26. Left turn yield on green by tepples · · Score: 2

    Under the United States MUTCD, a turn facing a green arrow is a "protected" left turn. Pedestrians have a "don't cross" signal during this phase. A turn facing a green disk is considered a "permitted" left turn, where oncoming traffic has the right of way. As with a yield sign, it is permitted to enter the intersection and to proceed through it once vehicular and pedestrian traffic have cleared. Some cities are experimenting with using a flashing yellow arrow instead of a green disk for a permitted left turn to emphasize the "yield" interpretation.

  27. How it works in the US by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Could someone explain for the non-Americans why it is possible to have cars turning left at a green light, at the same time as pedestrians crossing the road have a green light?

    First, because there is nothing to physically prevent pedestrians from crossing the road at any time, even when it is inadvisable to do so or when signs even directly instruct the pedestrians not to cross.

    Second, the general rule in most parts of the US is that pedestrians cross in the same direction as the traffic flow. That's how the cross-walk signals are programmed. Not all cross walks have crossing signals either though they are rather common. The vehicle traffic is always moving because stopping it for pedestrian traffic would seriously slow down traffic flow. In a city like NYC I cannot imagine the gridlock that would happen if they stopped the cars completely. If you argue that there is a better solution out there I might not disagree with you but that's how it is done for better or worse.

    And why is the solution not just to stop this happening?

    You can't stop it completely. You can mitigate it potentially but the only way to stop it completely is to prevent pedestrians from ever crossing the road ever.

  28. Re:or... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 2

    they could just put up "no left turn" signs

    That wold be fine, if Google cared. Hey, they fixed the "turn left" where there's a "no left turn" they send me the last time - but the U-turn they want me to do on the next intersection where there's a "no U-turn" sign is hardly better. At least in Germany Google Maps' database is still lousy.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  29. What happened to Common Sense? by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Hmm. How about teaching kids to do the simple, sane thing and Watch Where The Fuck they are going...??

    What happened to parents teaching their kids basic safety, and the old adage about "Looking both ways before crossing the street"?

    Seriously...do parents not teach kids the basic things about life? Don't talk to strangers, look both ways, cross street at intersections, etc.

    I guess I'm just puzzled why what used to be common sense has suddenly gone straight out the fucking window?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sometimes you look both ways and it is clear and while crossing the street someone still zooms through on a left turn and nearly hits you.

      I have nearly been hit a few times while crossing the street by careless drivers that drove through an intersection FAR too fast. This is all while paying attention to my surroundings.

      For a child they are smaller and even more likely to get hit.

      I can't wait for the day when humans are no longer permitted to drive.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    2. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you walk much in big cities and use crosswalks?

      Because in all honesty, I see a tremendous amount of drivers who don't even look for pedestrians and just race through the intersection. I've been crossing on a light and had some asshole turn right on red practically run me over, and I know damned well people actually do get run over.

      And some of these drivers are then yelling at the pedestrian for being in the way, because they're too stupid to realize just who is in whose way.

      Maybe the problem isn't about teaching children common sense, but in realizing that many drivers are practically homicidal in the way they drive a car.

      Because, I'm sorry ... but if I'm crossing a cross-walk on a walk signal, and you're turning right on red through the crosswalk, it's not ME who is at fault.

      You can look all you want, but when drivers don't seem to be aware of (or care about) pedestrians, that's the real damned problem.

      A tremendous amount of people turn into assholes and morons when they get behind the wheel.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by beanpoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you ever crossed the street in a large city? When you have the walk signal, cars also have a green light in your direction of travel. A car would likely be waiting until opposing traffic clears to make a left turn onto the street that you are crossing. Very often, cars will hit the gas as soon as traffic passes, not paying attention to the pedestrians crossing the street. The pedestrians did nothing wrong. There were no cars coming when they crossed.

    4. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 2

      I can't recall the last stop light like that I saw. In modern installations you turn left when you have a left arrow, and at those times pedestrians are not crossing the street.

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
    5. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by FranTaylor · · Score: 2

      I"m guessing you've never owned a car that is fun to drive...?

      You're missing out in life. The roar of a powerful engine, shifting....etc.

      Capitalists say "the kool-aid is working great, isn't it? Get them to worship REALLY expensive useless stuff!"

    6. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a totally bizarre thing America decided to do - have lights that means both cars and pedestrians go at the same time.

    7. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by bledri · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmm. How about teaching kids to do the simple, sane thing and Watch Where The Fuck they are going...??

      What happened to parents teaching their kids basic safety, and the old adage about "Looking both ways before crossing the street"?

      Seriously...do parents not teach kids the basic things about life? Don't talk to strangers, look both ways, cross street at intersections, etc.

      I guess I'm just puzzled why what used to be common sense has suddenly gone straight out the fucking window?

      Seriously? Pedestrians crossing the street with a walk sign get hit by someone making a left hand turn and you blame the pedestrian? The issue is the driver making the left is mostly focussed on oncoming traffic. As soon as they see an opening in oncoming traffic, they gun it with out checking if the crosswalk is clear. We can "blame" the victim like you are. We can blame and punish the driver. Or we can admit there are limits to human focus and do something to improve the situation.

      Clearly you don't walk, ride a bicycle, or a motorcycle on a regular basis or you would be aware that people in cars regularly change lanes, run red lights and make turns without noticing anything smaller than a passenger car.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    8. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by bledri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pedestrians have the right of way, which is true. But that doesn't mean they can slip into blissful ignorance, step off the curb into traffic and have a reasonable expectation that the car that is turning left will see them in time to stop. With your right comes some responsibility. Far too often I see pedestrians step into the crosswalk in such a way as to make it all but impossible for the left turning car to safely stop. Whereupon, they flip the driver a bird. That is assuming they even bother to acknowledge the herculean effort the driver put in to avoid their dumb ass.

      Asking Google to modify the code to reduce the number of suggested left turns is one way to MAYBE alter the outcome. An additional step would be to put some effort into a PSA campaign that tells pedestrians to watch where the hell they are going and stop behaving like they are entitled before they even step into the street.

      The fact that some pedestrians act "entitled" does not change the fact that cars regularly hit pedestrians that are following the law and are crossing with a walk sign. Why is this so hard to understand? Cars in many cities can turn left at a green light where pedestrians are crossing. The car, waiting for oncoming traffic to clear, sees an opening in oncoming traffic and punches it without looking for pedestrians. This happens all the time. I saw it happen this weekend.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    9. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by bledri · · Score: 2

      I'm gonna go out on a limb here but I suspect the idea of changing the algorithm to introduce more right turns to eliminate some left turns never occurred to you. But once you read the above story you were all like "oh yeah, that makes sense, what harm can come from that, what would it cost, oh man it might actually save money and time and lives andandand...

      Meanwhile, thankfully, there will be people that are accustomed to giving thought to long term ramifications and unintended consequences. Hence the phrase, cooler heads will prevail. Start looking at the problem from a logical point of view and less from your heart and you too might realize that education and personal responsibility may not be the best or only solution to the problem but are a better long term solution than having 4 million drivers making more right turns.

      Or, you might find, that making more right turns works out better for everyone. UPS minimizes left turns because it saves fuel even though it may increase the length of the route. But gravity forbid we look into alternatives to telling the victim of an accident "suck it up and take responsibility". A pedestrian can cross with a walk sign and some asshole stopped at a green light can see an opening in traffic and then make the turn without looking. This is the situation that they are trying to improve. There is nothing the pedestrian can do in this situation and it happens all the time.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    10. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by thsths · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Pedestrians have the right of way, which is true.

      > Far too often I see pedestrians step into the crosswalk in such a way as to make it all but impossible for the left turning car to safely stop.

      I think you fail to understand the concept of right of way. If you are going too fast to safely stop, you are going too fast.

    11. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yep; I once got yelled at because I stepped into a pedestrian crossing in front of a minivan who was driving too fast & not paying attention. It was a little neighborhood street, and there were a lot of little kids around, and I could see the driver had no idea that she should be stopping for us. So i stepped out, ready to jump back as needed, and she made a panic stop. Instead of apologizing she started yelling at me, and I gave it right back. Yeah, I was being an asshole, but I wasn't the asshole who might have killed a little kid who had stepped out instead of a 6 foot tall guy she still barely saw.

      Bring on the autonomous cars, I say.

    12. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by porges · · Score: 3, Informative

      As an NYC-specific fact: right turn on red is explicitly illegal within city limits.

    13. Re:What happened to Common Sense? by mjm1231 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're supposed to cross at an intersection if possible, and if not, at least where you have a clear line of sight in both directions. You're also supposed to wait until it's safe to cross. If you can't see if it's safe to cross, you're doing it wrong.

      Translation: Never ever cross the street in New York City.

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
  30. Re:or... by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, that's not the fundamental issue... which is:

    The turning driver has a green light right when pedestrians have the walk light

    When your city can reasonably be ranked as the top pedestrian city in the world, it might behoove you to plan accordingly by not putting your pedestrians directly into oncoming traffic.

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  31. I've seen it change... by wikthemighty · · Score: 2

    I have seen routes evolve on Google Maps - i.e. where it started to learn side roads and other shortcuts.

    Granted, the two examples I can think of changed over a period of at least a year, and might not be as noticeable as after you've driven a route a few times, you might not be using Google Maps the next time you drive it.

    Also, there's the "a faster route has become available" which will pop up, mostly due to reported accidents and changing traffic patterns.

    --
    "There are people who do not love their fellow human being, and I _hate_ people like that!" - Tom Lehrer
  32. Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right by wasteoid · · Score: 2

    but three rights make a left!

  33. Re:or... by smithmc · · Score: 2

    they could just put up "no left turn" signs

    ...which would snarl NYC traffic way worse than it already is. It's one thing to have a nav app work out a no-left-turn route for you, but are we going to expect to just know how to do so on their own?

    --
    Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
  34. Re:Left turn signals by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2

    If the driver has a green ARROW, then pedestrians do not have the right of way (and shouldn't have a walk sign). Green arrows are protected turns.

    --
    -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
    "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  35. Re:or... by Smauler · · Score: 2

    That list shows 17 out of 25 of the world's top pedestrian cities as being in of the US, 2 of those outside being in Canada. That leaves 6 for the rest of the world.

    I'm not usually one to complain about lists and articles being US-centric, but that is a little absurd.

  36. Re:or... by Rasperin · · Score: 2

    Seriously, when was the last time you used Google maps? Not only the one on my mobile phone but the one on my desktop tries to give me first the quickest route (which usually involves hiways for long periods of time), second an optional route with no tolls, third several other route choices of different combinations. No seriously, they have had an "avoid tolls" check box on there site for the longest time.

    Lastly, it tends to be faster than my garmin at recalculating (and more precise) but my garmin is like 6ish years old so that probably has little to do with them and far more to do with me failing to update my tech.

    --
    WTF Slashdot, why do I have to login 50 times to post?