When red-light cameras are installed at an intersection, the number of rear-end accidents typically increases as drivers unexpectedly slow down instead of speeding up at yellow lights.
The cost of these accidents is borne by just about everyone, except the authority profitably operating the red lights. (To be fair, some statistics also show a decrease in right-angle collisions, which is kinda the point of the red-light rules to begin with.)
That seems only like a temporary problem until people get used to actually stopping at red lights, as they are supposed to. After the initial acceptance phase, it should minimise accidents over the longer term.
Unless there is a warning of how long is left on the yellow light, it’s an unsolvable problem because there is an asymmetric risk of stopping vs accelerating
The lights should be designed so that if you don't have enough space to stop with a mild deceleration you should just go through. If a mild deceleration get you rear ended then of course that's an unsolvable problem
No one wants to risk a ticket with a guess at how long the yellow is going to be, or whether they’ll make it thru or not. That is the unsolvable part. Yellows are inconsistent , and you aren’t accounting for slow-moving traffic ahead of you that might cause you to block the intersection, etc.
There was actually a scandal in Chicago were a study found that the city systematically reduced the length of yellows only on lights that had red light cameras in order to harvest tickets.
I feel like the subtext of all these concerns is that you'd need to drive very carefully to reliably avoid camera tickets... and nobody wants to drive that carefully. I get it, I don't either, and I do get occasional camera tickets. But like: I should also be driving more carefully.
My memory may be outdated or only local to my jurisdiction but my understanding is that yellow means “do not enter the intersection” where “intersection” begins before the box, usually with some alternate street indicator, like broken white lines turning to solid, at a braking distance that accounts for posted speed limit and yellow light duration.
You probably don't, as your current phone ought to last for years. But hardware manufacturers, like software developers, benefit from faster release cycles.
Interesting idea. If you're of age, then arguably there would be no material deception from using a fake or borrowed ID to prove that you're of age.
I don't believe for a second that this argument would stand up in court, but it would at least be a rational form of protest against having to identify yourself.
The cost-benefit analysis has changed. It's now easier to build something indulgently complex -- something of larger scale than a "side project" -- for just a few people.
People have been buying subscription cars for years. Buy a car on credit. Stop paying the installments, and the car goes away, just like a subscription.
The analogy isn't perfect. But the way the money moves, and the effect of not paying, are identical.
If you already have a Framework laptop, it's nice to be able to reuse the extra cards that you might have lying around. "Leveraging the benefits of the Framework ecosystem," as a marketing person might say.
The cost of these accidents is borne by just about everyone, except the authority profitably operating the red lights. (To be fair, some statistics also show a decrease in right-angle collisions, which is kinda the point of the red-light rules to begin with.)
reply