Slashdot Mirror


Waze and Other Traffic Dodging Apps Prompt Cities To Game the Algorithms (usatoday.com)

KindMind writes: USA today reports that Waze and others are causing traffic planners to try to figure out how to gain control back. From the article: "While traffic savvy GPS apps like Waze and Google Maps have provided users a way to get around traffic, it has caused massive headaches for city planners. With highways frequently congested, navigation apps like Google Maps and Waze started telling drivers to hop off the freeway at Fremont's Mission Boulevard, cut through residential streets and then hop back on the highway where things were clearer -- much to the distress of the people who lived there. 'The commuters didn't live or work in Fremont and didn't care about our residential neighborhoods,' said Noe Veloso, Fremont's principal transportation engineer. Fremont instituted commute-hour turn restrictions on the most heavily used residential cut-through routes. The city also partnered with Waze through its Connected Citizens Program in order to share data and information, such as the turn restrictions, so that the app takes them into account. The result has been effective, but Veloso is worried the changes may simply reroute commuters into other neighborhoods."

23 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. I'm hungry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    God forbid that someone gets off a freeway and discovers a local establishment while passing through.

    1. Re:I'm hungry by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful

      God forbid that someone gets off a freeway and discovers a local establishment while passing through.

      Having owned a business along such a commuter route... All I can say is ROTFLMAO. You have no idea what you're talking about.

      All those commuters care about is getting the hell out of Dodge and back onto the freeway and getting home. They're not even looking at the local businesses.

    2. Re:I'm hungry by meerling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So instead people sit in a traffic jam, and make it worse, trapping more people, and still the people that are close enough to an exit will still end up taking it to drive through residential areas, and tend to do so for a longer distance both because the traffic is backed up further, and often they don't know just when it's cleared up and get on after that point... Seems to me the apps are reducing the problems for everyone while some bozo in the local government is annoyed that traffic is rerouting past his damaged system.

    3. Re:I'm hungry by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seems to me the apps are reducing the problems for everyone

      Except the people living in the rat runs. Pollution goes up, health deteriorates and costs increase. Accidents increase, insurance goes up. Property prices decrease, they can't use the street for other things any more.

      There is a reason that major roads are kept separate from where people live.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Time To Invest In Infrastructure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh, you mean we're just supposed to sit in gridlock instead? Our highways have been an inadequate crumbling mess for decades. The proper response here is to fix them, not gripe that there's an inadequate workaround.

    1. Re:Time To Invest In Infrastructure by xevioso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By "fixing" do you mean widen? Which usually actually ADDS to congestion on many cases?

    2. Re:Time To Invest In Infrastructure by xevioso · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or you can do what most major cities around the world do, which is fund mass transit at extremely high levels, to encourage people to not drive.

      The Bay Area has some unique geographical features that make the sort of public transit that works extremely well in other places more difficult here; that said, it's still pretty good.

    3. Re:Time To Invest In Infrastructure by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it's selfish people who don't use mass transit and idiots living one hour away from work that are the problem.

      Yes, those inconsiderate bastards that can't find a job that's only 5 minutes away from where they live! Who do they think they are??

      Newsflash, dumbfuck: EVERYONE would love to live close to where their job is, but it doesn't always work out that way.

      Shockingly, some people change jobs once in a while, and even more shockingly, some people can't afford to move or find it impractical to do so.

      Should I move away from the home I've lived in for 20+ years just to be a little closer to wherever it is I work? No fucking way.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    4. Re:Time To Invest In Infrastructure by cvdwl · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nobody rides BART anymore, it's too crowded.

      --
      ... grumble, grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter, Millenium... Hand... Shrimp, I tol' 'em, I tol' 'em.
  3. Public roads? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are the roads paid for by public taxes? They're public roads. I used to do this all the time with the old paper maps. Looks like a road stoppage? Find a parallel city or state road. Follow the speed limits and other rules of the road and you're legally allowed to drive on them.

    Want a gated community with private roads? Pay to live in one.

    1. Re:Public roads? by swb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's mostly my attitude.

      In Minnesota, MNDOT decided to close all of US-169 to replace a bridge/causeway and now a whole bunch of people are trying to cut through side streets versus taking the MNDOT-approved detours, which are on parallel freeways miles away.

      What's funny is that the city they're driving through, Edina, is probably the wealthiest one in the whole state and the residents are MELTING DOWN over the cut-through traffic. They're organizing vigilante slow traffic, the city has been cracking down hard on traffic violations and has put up all manner of "calming" obstructions to discourage people.

      It's so hard to not link their economic privilege with their apparent sense of geographic privilege. I think they believe they ARE living in a gated community and somebody left the gate open.

    2. Re:Public roads? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are the roads paid for by public taxes? They're public roads.

      Well, for one, commuters frequently are cutting through roads which aren't in their own community. So, unless it's a state road or something, they may not be paying taxes for these roads.

      Second, neighborhoods are often planned and zoned based on assumed traffic patterns. For example, they may choose to put a school or tight residential areas farther away from heavy traffic commuter highways -- for safety reasons. If you suddenly start routing rush-hour traffic through there, it can create hazards with pedestrians, driveways, kids playing, etc.

      The problem isn't new, though -- and many towns and cities even have policies on the books to deal with it. The difference is that in years past traffic patterns would change over years or decades, whereas now they can be altered quite suddenly with a map app's algorithm. Long before stuff like Waze, the city I used to live in had a series of progressive restrictions it would make on streets that exceeded their designed traffic load for the zoning, etc.

      They'd put in more one-way streets to make it more difficult to navigate the area without a lot of turns, then introduce things like raised crossings to slow people down (and help point out places where pedestrians might be very common), eventually they'd covert some streets to cul-de-sacs, and in a worst case scenario might even put a mid-block barrier to stop traffic going through entirely.

      These weren't actions undertaken by citizens -- this was official stuff in the municipal code of the city, authorized by the city's governing council, elected by the city's taxpayers who paid for the city's road maintenance. If you're a commuter who doesn't like those policies... drive on somebody else's "public roads."

  4. "It's a feature, not a bug" - seriously by davidwr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but Veloso is worried the changes may simply reroute commuters into other neighborhoods.

    Rerouting traffic to the best available route is a feature, not a bug. Seriously, it's a feature. Don't mess with it.

    If you really don't want people cutting through neighborhoods during rush hour, then put up temporary traffic-flow restrictions in ALL neighborhoods during those hours and make sure Waze, Google, etc. know about them.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  5. Bandaid by Thelasko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a bandaid on the much deeper problem. Inadequate highway infrastructure. Fix the root cause, not the symptom.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  6. Learn the Lesson of Water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Q: How does water get where it's going?

    A: Any way it has to.

    Commuters and drivers are like water. Put up a barrier and the "water" will adapt, and rather faster than a creaky bureaucracy can keep up.

  7. Re:Or politicians can go back to basic services by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The buses have a 15% utilization rate? Sound here the buses hold 90 off people when full. At 15%, that's about 10 people. They take up the space of little more than a car when travelling at speed: the safety gap you need to leave is far longer than the bus. Sounds like a net win for making more space available for cars.

    I'll also bet that like here, the utilization is MUCH higher at rush hour, when demand for space on the road is heaviest, meaning the gains are much better.

    Or, you know, politicians could spend the gas tax funds to improve the freeways and stop pissing them away on mass transit buses that have a 15% utilization rate...

    They could, but I always find it strange when drivers make these kinds of complaints. The most effective thing for improving things for drivers is to get fewer people to drive. That way the roads will be clearer for you. Objecting to politicians spending money on non-car forms of transport seems to be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  8. It's not the highway infrastructure by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real root of the problem is that people are either unwilling or unable to live within a short distance to their workplace. Many large cities were not designed to handle the volume of commuters that we have had for at least 20 years. People live in the suburbs (for a variety of reasons; some due to economics, others due to a desire to live in areas with lower population density), and commute to the city centers to work. This was okay when suburban sprawl was not as extreme as it is now. In the Bay Area, people can't afford to live close to work due to the insane real estate market. And they don't want to live in shoebox apartments, either.

    The problem can only be solved by reducing the need for people to commute. There are a lot of ways to do this:

    1. Encourage employees to work remotely where possible.
    2. Decrease the cost of living in the city center or areas close to work.
    3. Provide financial incentives for employees to live near their job site.
    4. Allow more flexible working hours so that traffic volume can be distributed over a longer period of time.
    5. Self-driving cars have the potential to reduce accidents and increase traffic flow efficiency.

    Notice I did not include public transit. Public transit is only good for people who already live sufficiently close or do not need the flexibility of traveling by car. In Los Angeles, public transit is a complete joke. To commute from a suburb to downtown can take over 90 minutes, whereas driving by car--even in traffic--is at least 30 minutes faster, simply because train frequencies and network densities are too low. Sure, it's great if you only need to travel two or three stations and the trains run every five minutes...but for the vast majority of commuters this is not realistic. Commuters want and need to drive cars.

    1. Re:It's not the highway infrastructure by jeff4747 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In Los Angeles, public transit is a complete joke.

      >90% of the buildings in the Los Angeles area are 3 stories or less.

      The problem is not public transit in and of itself. The problem is zoning restrictions that prevent the density required for effective public transit.

  9. Americans always see this issue backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As an expat who has lived all over the planet, the best organized cities make it really hard to drive *through* neighborhoods by which a neighborhood is maybe one 8x8 block region divided from other similar neighborhoods by a main artery road.

    Germany is perhaps the best at this city planning skill. One learns fast to never try to drive *through* such a neighorhood block because you will go mad. Dead end obstacles, trees planted in the middle of the road that you must slooooow down for, super narrow roads (despite wide sidewalks and ample parking), and raised platforms at crosswalks(think of a 5 yard thick speed bump) make going around them the only sensible choice.

    They do it because they believe if cars are going fast enough to kill children in small neighborhoods, it is a street design problem so they are often solving high traffic rates by intentionally making it impossible to drive fast with the above car thwarting techniques. Side effect is that waze is moot here and neighborhoods all remain quiet and safe.

    Also makes it so they have no police enforcing speed limits in such neighborhoods. The streets are made super narrow and convoluted exactly to the degree necessary to keep you at or below the intended speed limit. The attitude is also something like "If you dont like it, then get on public transit" , which by the way is also fantastic in Germany.

    Traffic and speeding are both just engineering problems waiting to be fixed if you see it clearly.

  10. Bus downtime; housing cost gradient by tepples · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's selfish people who don't use mass transit

    If you live in a city that doesn't run its buses from 8:45 PM to 5:45 AM (source), and you're given hours at night, you need a car in order not to have to spend the majority of your paycheck on a taxi or lose your job. If you live in a city that doesn't run its buses on Sundays, and you're given hours on Sunday, you need a car in order not to have to spend the majority of your paycheck on a taxi or lose your job.

    and idiots living one hour away from work that are the problem.

    A lot of jobs don't pay enough to rent a place to live closer to work. How are people "idiots" for taking advantage of a sharp gradient in annual housing costs? Perhaps the real "idiots" serve on the city's zoning board that created this situation.

    1. Re:Bus downtime; housing cost gradient by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it's selfish people who don't use mass transit

      If you live in a city that doesn't run its buses from 8:45 PM to 5:45 AM (source), and you're given hours at night, you need a car in order not to have to spend the majority of your paycheck on a taxi or lose your job. If you live in a city that doesn't run its buses on Sundays, and you're given hours on Sunday, you need a car in order not to have to spend the majority of your paycheck on a taxi or lose your job.

      And if you're paying for a car anway, you don't want to pay the same amount again for a month pass, even if your usual hours are not at night or on sunday.

      --
      bickerdyke
  11. Re:Or politicians can go back to basic services by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's funny. Two local buses and an express bus gets me from my front door at 6AM to the front door of my job 30 miles away at 7AM. Best commute I ever had in 30 years of taking public transit.

    And you probably represent a small fraction of a small percent. In many areas of the county, the mass transit simply doesn't work well because everyone is going everywhere and there are not enough routes or connections. Nobody is going to trade crawling in a traffic jam for an hour (in their own car) to standing outside multiple times in the rain, jumping from one bus to another, dealing with smelly and loud people for 1.5 hours.

  12. Re:Or politicians can go back to basic services by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is that a problem with public transport in general or just your poor implementation of it?

    In Tokyo you can get everywhere on public transport, which runs every few minutes. It's often faster than driving. They build the tracks and over and under, even though it costs more, because they need them and 50 year ROI is fine.

    the mass transit simply doesn't work well because everyone is going everywhere and there are not enough routes or connections

    Personal transport simply doesn't work because everyone is going to the same place and there are is not enough capacity on the main trunk roads.

    Part of fixing this requires designing your cities so that it is possible to walk or cycle around them, so that when you get off the train or bus it's no problem to walk a short way to your destination.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC