fractional slacker Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 I have adopted the following strategy after listening to Adam Carolla who preaches about treating red left turn arrows as yield signs. He just goes when traffic is clear and it's safe, as opposed to waiting for green arrow. He laughs at the people behind him who start honking and throwing up their hands like WTH. He's done this for 15 years, brags about it, and has never received a ticket.Waiting in line on freeway on ramp. One by one each car waits for green light and then proceeds. Meanwhile the right lane on freeway is practically empty and not being used because everyone is stuck on the ramp waiting for the retarded green light to tell them when to go. I only do this when the turnpike is not congested and the stupid meter should not even be on. What I do when I get up to the front line is trail the car next to me when they get a green light. I then allow adequate space so we don't merge together which could potentially cause very minor slow down. Ideally the guy behind me would then take my green light and we have moved 3 cars in the time it normally takes to move 2 cars. But no. The guy behind me is too scared and just sits through a perfectly good green light. What do you guys think. Am I a bad driver? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCapitalism Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Am I a bad driver? Yep. But really, how different are your driving choices from those who break speed limits? I can't say your decision is especially egregious. An estimated 165,000 people are injured annually by red-light runners. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) reports that half of the people killed in red-light running crashes are not the signal violators. They are drivers and pedestrians hit by red-light runners (Source: Status Report, Vol. 42, No. 1, IIHS, Jan 2007). wow. that may change things... I didn't even know there were statistics on this. http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/redlight/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnumPI Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 I'd say no. It's the same with almost all traffic enforcement. How stopping everyone promotes free-flow of traffic is a purely statist invention. You gotta be fucked up to buy that shit. When the majority of people learn how to keep right, except to pass, I'll take traffic laws seriously. But until then, the state punishes efficiency and encourages congestion, which leads to accidents, and wasted energy, effects on the environment. Even moving the goddamned HOV/Carpool lane(that's, the slowest cars on the road:biggest, most burdened with passenger load, least HP and most amount of stops. Trucks excluded obviously, but hey! Those motherfuckers keep right!) where it's supposed to be which is not the passing lane, would convince me to at least entertain statist driving habits. But you gotta crawl before you can walk and right now, they're still sucking tit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasatchMan Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Ramp meters are implemented for a purpose. There is nothing statist about them, they arise out of a study of empirical data and traffic engineering. They meter the flow of traffic onto the interstate which keeps the freeway operating at better average speeds during high volume time periods. When there is not sufficient gaps in freeway traffic to accept free-flow ramp traffic to merge into the interstate, just letting the free flow happen would result in what is caused a "shock-wave" which would slow the entire operation of the freeway for miles. It is a very simple concept from a traffic modeling perspective and it is implemented because it works. Sure, it may sometimes appear that they are not serving a purpose, but this is a result of the technology used to operate the system causing the implementation of a "one-size-fits-all" approach. Old technology runs off a "time of day" paradigm where they will turn on at the same time everyday based on historically observed traffic patterns. Newer technology allows ramp metering to work based on actual traffic, and they are more effective... and yes, I accept technology would be better in a free market paradigm, but that goes for everything that is heavily statist controlled and does not take away from the empirical observations of the benefits of ramp metering. Are you a bad driver? I don't know. I categorize some more aggressive drivers as "capacity warriors" because their choices help the overall flow of traffic, and their intelligence to predict the system overrides the need to implement "one-size-fits-all" approaches to engineering solutions, but not everyone has the intelligence to judge the situations appropriately and bad choices could impact overall operations and safety. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnumPI Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Traffic lights are the reason large swaths of cars hit the on-ramp all at the same time in the first place. And there exists studies that show their ineffectiveness.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwHfibl1AoI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ap2G1Bfm0M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q5Nur642BU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasatchMan Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Traffic lights are the reason large swaths of cars hit the on-ramp all at the same time in the first place. And there exists studies that show their ineffectiveness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwHfibl1AoI Traffic engineering is a free market. If people have better solutions, they can do their studies, show better ways of handling things (through empirical results), and make lots of money based off their better ideas. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnumPI Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Traffic engineering is a free market. If people have better solutions, they can do their studies, show better ways of handling things (through empirical results), and make lots of money based off their better ideas. OH? I missed that mention in my AAA about where roads are being built free of arbitrary edict from state, municipal and county code. Where is it? I'm getting a new F-Type soon, that sounds like the place to be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasatchMan Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 OH? I missed that mention in my AAA about where roads are being built free of arbitrary edict from state, municipal and county code. Where is it? I'm getting a new F-Type soon, that sounds like the place to be. Anyone can propose better ideas. Even though the mechanism is the state, they are open to better ways of handling traffic if the data shows that. I work with tons of traffic engineers in the free market (I am not one - I am a design engineer) and they are always modeling traffic and looking for better ideas (because that gets them paid). Roads are traffic engineered, designed, and built by the free-market, and paid for through the use of force. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnumPI Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Great, can you show me where the better ideas are being implemented? To my understanding, there isn't anywhere left where speed limits aren't being set by the average speed, at least in the US, for starters. And roundabouts are still all but a myth. Every time a new city tries simply timing up the traffic lights, it makes news. And I don't accept your definition of free market. It goes through the state? That's just the opposite of free, but whatever. If you can show me where the good stuff is happening, I'll go check it out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasatchMan Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Great, can you show me where the better ideas are being implemented? To my understanding, there isn't anywhere left where speed limits aren't being set by the average speed, at least in the US, for starters. And roundabouts are still all but a myth. Every time a new city tries simply timing up the traffic lights, it makes news. And I don't accept your definition of free market. It goes through the state? That's just the opposite of free, but whatever. If you can show me where the good stuff is happening, I'll go check it out. In Utah they have implemented Continuous Flow Intersections, Divergent Diamond Interchanges, Thru-U-Turn intersections, and reversible lane corridors, all innovative ways to handle more capacity based on traffic engineering analysis and studies. A = A no matter if the state is involved or not. Traffic engineering is a scientific discipline based on empirical data. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirgall Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 On a serious note, red left turn signals in the Seattle and the east side are being converted to flashing yellow lights for a "left turn when clear" situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnumPI Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Those are some good examples. I'll check them out. Unfortunately, Utah is a state I've driven in and spent most of my time watching empty intersections because of a light. Provo was the worst. Edit: Sorry, Redwood is the joke joke with lights every 2 miles and a ridiculously low speed limit, considering its light crowd and is it 3 or 4 lanes in each direction? Bangerter is still inexplicably slow and lights suck. They claim to have it timed, but again, if they're timed based on arbitrarily slow speeds, it's a wash. Engineering doesn't matter. The laws are the laws. If the empiricism says no speed limit, the law says nope. That is not free, it's conditional. Every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fractional slacker Posted July 2, 2015 Author Share Posted July 2, 2015 Anyone can propose better ideas. Even though the mechanism is the state, they are open to better ways of handling traffic if the data shows that. I work with tons of traffic engineers in the free market (I am not one - I am a design engineer) and they are always modeling traffic and looking for better ideas (because that gets them paid). Roads are traffic engineered, designed, and built by the free-market, and paid for through the use of force. My experience has been automobiles, driving, and mass transit are first subject to political agendas and graft long before any free market considerations. While the free market may be allowed some breathing room in some jurisdictions, it is just as likely to be prohibited in others depending on the political climate. Red light cameras are good example. You can find countless places where red light cameras were implemented not as a safety measure but to steal more money. When installed, some places would decrease amount of time for yellow light. That scam lasted over a decade before politicians were forced to back pedal in some areas and remove the parasitical devices. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasatchMan Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Those are some good examples. I'll check them out. Unfortunately, Utah is a state I've driven in and spent most of my time watching empty intersections because of a light. Provo was the worst. Edit: Sorry, Redwood is the joke joke with lights every 2 miles and a ridiculously low speed limit, considering its light crowd and is it 3 or 4 lanes in each direction? Bangerter is still inexplicably slow and lights suck. They claim to have it timed, but again, if they're timed based on arbitrarily slow speeds, it's a wash. Engineering doesn't matter. The laws are the laws. If the empiricism says no speed limit, the law says nope. That is not free, it's conditional. Every time. I am not trying to claim the system is optimal, it is far from it - all I am trying to say it that there is still science and empiricism behind the decisions that are made in a statist system. Is it hampered by the sticky glue of being funded through force? Of course it is. However, I think you would be surprised how much room there is to innovate in this field and people could make a lot of money if they could come up with silver bullet ideas to fix traffic. Hell, I work for the company that brought the Continuous Flow Intersection to Utah (and the U.S. for that matter) and it took making a good case for their benefits (which are huge) but finally the state was convinced to try it. There is no statist engineer or bureaucrat I have ever met that was against helping traffic flow if you could come up with better ideas, it is just a shit system where there is little competition in road owners. Competition would mean that innovation was not just a consideration, but a necessity in order to stay in business at all. Which I agree, would help traffic flow immensely. Bangerter is going to have 4 of its intersections converted to interchanges in the next 2-3 years. The cost to implement this will be between $150-200 million. This is the cost of getting rid of lights, so they hold off as long as possible because they can't afford to do it all while maintaining what they have. As for speed limits, they are far from arbitrary. One of the main components of designing a road is the design speed. This controls factors like the size of horizontal curve you can have, how long you have to make a vertical curve to change grade, how quickly you taper a lane over, stopping sight distance, how close you can have objects to the roadway, etc. They will raise the speed limit once it is implemented and empirical data shows that it is safe to do so since people already driving that fast and they are not experiencing a peak in accidents. One things with roads is that people die on them frequently, and this makes a lot of people really cautious of the ideas they implement. Individual engineers are required to seal their designs with their name, and are held responsible for what happens with the designs they have signed. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fractional slacker Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 Ramp signal is on. No one in cue. Why drive up to the light, stop, and wait for a green light? Waste of time. Waste of gas. I see this at least once a week. I attribute this insanity to deontology law worshiping. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts