Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by arghbleargh on Saturday September 10, 2016 @11:37AM
(#12469650)
It makes sense to control pedestrian traffic in some intersections, but it just seems like they're not even trying to optimize pedestrian throughput. What makes the lack of feedback for crossing buttons worse is the fact that many of them are so conservative about letting you cross that you question if they are working. I encounter a lot that will refuse to let you cross if the light is already green, even if there is still plenty of time left. Unfortunately, lowering pedestrian accidents looks great, while saving pedestrian time is hard to measure.
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by jclulow on Saturday September 10, 2016 @12:51PM
(#12469964)
I would much rather be safer than a few seconds faster.
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by jdavis703 on Saturday September 10, 2016 @01:52PM
(#12470228)
What if you miss the train and have to wait 15-30 minutes longer because of a red light?
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by CaptSpify on Saturday September 10, 2016 @05:15PM
(#12470907)
Then you shoukd have left 5 minutes earlier.
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by enoch_r on Saturday September 10, 2016 @01:37PM
(#12470183)
In certain especially pedestrian unfriendly places I've lived (orange county area), the buttons really do give pedestrians a lower status. First, you don't get the walk sign if the button wasn't pressed before the light changed, even when the light is long enough for the pedestrian cycle. Second, you must press the button before the light changes, or you don't get the light. Third, the pedestrian light turns red far, far earlier than necessary (like, the light will stay green for 90 seconds after the pedestrian signal turns red).
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by DanBC on Saturday September 10, 2016 @09:05AM
(#12469006)
> and having them coexist in adjacent physical space and intersect each other inevitably requires some set of rules describing who will have priority and when.
Zebra crossings (where pedestrians get right of way unless it's dangerous for vehicles to stop) seem to work pretty well.
Re:Australian traffic button pushes beautiful design
by nxzero on Saturday September 10, 2016 @10:09AM
(#12469271)
Right of way is a deadly concept unless the driver knows of the concept, enforcement is actually done, and breaking this rule, at the very least, results in the driver losing their right to drive.
Driving and walking are wildly disparate modes of transportation, and having them coexist in adjacent physical space and intersect each other inevitably requires some set of rules describing who will have priority and when.
Many intersections in cities simply have a fixed repetitive cycle of granting priority to different modes in different directions each in turn automatically. Those which require explicit "requesting" of priority typically occur when traffic of a given mode or in a given direction is light enough, compared to other modes/directions, that the overall highest throughput occurs from explicit request. It's also not incredibly burdensome to use a button for this in the case of the pedestrian; detection mechanisms for motorized vehicles/bicycles on the road are there because a button would be unwieldy for those vehicles, not because designers of intersections want to force pedestrians into some type of ultra-lowest-class group. Indeed, the "high class" (in your view) automatic detection is often unreliable and leads to a far more conscious feeling of having to work to obtain priority, as vehicles shift forward and back hunting for the magic spot that will trigger the detector.
And honestly, the number of buttons which are non-functional but simply exist to provide a placebo feeling of speeding up an otherwise fixed pattern in which everyone gets priority in turn makes it kind of a silly argument anyway.