Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#51

Post by mkr-hn »

burgerbrain wrote: post #31
mkr-hn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are situations, most streets in and around Atlanta for example, where "slower traffic" means a vehicle going the speed limit. Most people around here don't trust that the engineers who plan roads have some sense of what they're doing. :)

Speed limits on roads are almost always political decisions, not engineering ones. How else do you explain the straight as an arrow, flat as a pane of glass, brand-spanking-new, 60mph limit roads crisscrossing the american midwest?

Limiting speeds on roads that cut through farmland is probably a good idea. Imagine the damage that would be caused if a car hurtling down the rocketway at 90 intersected with a loose cow, tractor, or someone checking a mailbox that's perilously close to the road.

Drivers have time to react at 60.

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#52

Post by alexqgb »

Xurinos wrote: post #42
burgerbrain wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Let's talk about road rage now. In the presence of signs that clearly state "slower traffic keep right", why would you be angry if someone drives slower on the left? Sure, they are disobeying traffic signs, breaking the law, etc, but why is that your concern? What gives you the authority to "punish" (honking horns, riding a lawbreaker's tail, giving the finger on your way by, swerving angrily around to indicate your…

> it's wrong specifically because it negatively effects other drivers on the road. It is surely wrong if the person is traveling below the lower speed limit (be it specified explicitly or legally in the absence of the lower speed limit markers). Otherwise, it is just other people being impatient, and their reactions -- such as abruptly swerving around the driver or making a lot of distracting noise -- also cause the…

Not so at all. The person traveling slowly enough to break the otherwise smooth flow of traffic is creating a danger exponentially greater than the one created by a honking horn. If they're drunk or severely fatigued (as opposed to merely distracted) then the problem is even worse, and the need for corrective cues from surrounding drivers is even greater.

Contrary to what you say, the signal provided by the honking horn - while certainly negative - is actually pro-social and pro-safety, in that it's prompting an anti-social and dangerous actor to change his behavior.

Obviously, if this corrective behavior extends to aggressive tail-gating, screaming and yelling, brandishing firearms, or any other objectively dangerous act that makes the honker a part of the problem, then yes, they're both in the wrong. Once the honker's response escalates to actual rage, then he is - almost by definition - more dangerous than the trigger.

However, if the necessary negative feedback is provided with a reasonable measure of restraint (i.e. one that's likely to reduce, and not exacerbate the larger problem) then it's a good thing for everyone. Indeed, the willingness to assert yourself for the sake of safety in situations where others are distracted to the point of becoming general impediments is something that distinguished good drivers from bad.

And yes, promoting good flow is synonymous with promoting safety. There is an inverse relationship between the quality of flow and the likelihood of a collision.

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#53

Post by gaius »

Semiapies wrote: post #40
georgemcbay wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time I approach sidewalk rage is with those side-by-side walkers. Nothing sets me off like a group of 3 people approaching me in the opposite direction on a sidewalk that is exactly wide enough for 3 people to walk side-by-side, and all 3 clearly see me and none of them give me a path to walk by them. ONE OF YOU JACKASSES IS GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE OR GET WALKED INTO.... IT IS SIMPLE PHYSICS HERE! ehm... sorry…

My solution: if there's nobody behind you... stop . They assume, consciously or not, that you will change course for their benefit, but you can't change course if you're not moving. Suddenly, you become a stationary object, and they will adjust to that. I've never had people blunder into me when I've done that, and I've sometimes noticed them correct their walking formation afterward.

I prefer the thousand yard stare... Then they all move!

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#54

Post by Xurinos »

alexqgb wrote: post #52
Xurinos wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's wrong specifically because it negatively effects other drivers on the road. It is surely wrong if the person is traveling below the lower speed limit (be it specified explicitly or legally in the absence of the lower speed limit markers). Otherwise, it is just other people being impatient, and their reactions -- such as abruptly swerving around the driver or making a lot of distracting noise -- also cause the…

Not so at all. The person traveling slowly enough to break the otherwise smooth flow of traffic is creating a danger exponentially greater than the one created by a honking horn. If they're drunk or severely fatigued (as opposed to merely distracted) then the problem is even worse, and the need for corrective cues from surrounding drivers is even greater. Contrary to what you say, the signal provided by the honking h…

I agree with you. However, our opinions on efficient traffic flow are irrelevant for two reasons.

First, the only rule of the road generally recognized, followed or not, is the letter of the law. What some random Internet guy thinks should also be a rule of the road, even if he is 100% right, does not matter. As someone else mentioned, that is politics.

Second, the key point I have been trying to make in this scenario is that honking your horn (or whatever reaction) is a reflection of your narcissism, your self-absorption. You feel entitled to attempt to control somebody else in order to get your way (even if you rationalize your way to be "for the good of others around me"). Sometimes that control is okay.

The entire thread regards angry reactions. We are angry when something happens that is out of our control, out of our perfect little plan for the world. We are angry because it should go our way.

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#55

Post by burgerbrain »

mkr-hn wrote: post #51
burgerbrain wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speed limits on roads are almost always political decisions, not engineering ones. How else do you explain the straight as an arrow, flat as a pane of glass, brand-spanking-new, 60mph limit roads crisscrossing the american midwest?

Limiting speeds on roads that cut through farmland is probably a good idea. Imagine the damage that would be caused if a car hurtling down the rocketway at 90 intersected with a loose cow, tractor, or someone checking a mailbox that's perilously close to the road. Drivers have time to react at 60.

I'm talking interstates, not regular old roads. Last time I crossed the country by car (about a year ago) the average speed-limit was very low, absolutely not set at the safe driving speed. I forget what it was exactly, might have been more of an average at 65, but it was dramatically low.

Interestingly, iirc the exception to this was North Dakota. As I recall there were plenty of 70-80mph segments there (still low, but with the 5mph tolerance it was reasonable).

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#56

Post by burgerbrain »

Xurinos wrote: post #54
alexqgb wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so at all. The person traveling slowly enough to break the otherwise smooth flow of traffic is creating a danger exponentially greater than the one created by a honking horn. If they're drunk or severely fatigued (as opposed to merely distracted) then the problem is even worse, and the need for corrective cues from surrounding drivers is even greater. Contrary to what you say, the signal provided by the honking h…

I agree with you. However, our opinions on efficient traffic flow are irrelevant for two reasons. First, the only rule of the road generally recognized, followed or not, is the letter of the law. What some random Internet guy thinks should also be a rule of the road, even if he is 100% right, does not matter. As someone else mentioned, that is politics. Second, the key point I have been trying to make in this scenari…

"First, the only rule of the road generally recognized, followed or not, is the letter of the law."

I really sincerely hope that you do not have your drivers license, because that is incredibly wrong.

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#57

Post by lukeschlather »

dasil003 wrote: post #36
lukeschlather wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us have done too much work in environments where VCS scares people. Actually, when I worked with UniBASIC/Datatel, VCS was basically impossible because the architecture was so bizarre. Unless I wanted to write my own, and of course I had actual tasks I was trying to accomplish and writing a VCS was not really worth it if I couldn't get anyone else to use it. Better to adopt the habit of copying database recor…

One nice use of git in this circumstance is just turning some directory into a versioned directory. Then every time you work on it, you commit everything that's there with a comment "all the shit everyone else did since I last touched it", then you have a nice record of what you did and also big clusters documenting whatever fuckups may have occurred.

I seriously considered it. It probably would have worked, since database tables were implemented as delimited text files. [1][2]

But our vendor had their own deployment system, and there was zero chance of them sending us Git patches instead of their proprietary ones, and most of what we did was integrate patches from the vendor into our code. So really I took the only option available to me.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pick_operating_system

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_U2

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#58

Post by JeffL »

pinko wrote: post #34
edw519 wrote: post #8

Closely related: Checkout-Line Rage: When you empty your shopping cart with only one hand because you're on the phone. When you don't step forward to enable the next person to emply her cart. When you take 27 items through the express line. When you pay by credit/debit/check/etc. and don't know how. When you use coupons. Movie Theater Rage: When you enter the theater 5 minutes after the movie started and complain you…

> [...] When you use coupons. Unlike many of your other examples I'm not sure I see how someone using coupons could be considered inconsiderate towards you. It's not like they have a faster option (aside from paying more).

I'm not sure what exactly this is, but I've been behind people a few times where they are using some kind of elaborate coupons that the cashier has to double check and compare to the items and it takes literally 5+ minutes to go through it all. Maybe food stamps. But it is really frustrating.

Regular coupons can just be instantly scanned by the bar code reader and take no time at all.

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#59

Post by [deleted] »

burgerbrain wrote: post #55
mkr-hn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Limiting speeds on roads that cut through farmland is probably a good idea. Imagine the damage that would be caused if a car hurtling down the rocketway at 90 intersected with a loose cow, tractor, or someone checking a mailbox that's perilously close to the road. Drivers have time to react at 60.

I'm talking interstates, not regular old roads. Last time I crossed the country by car (about a year ago) the average speed-limit was very low, absolutely not set at the safe driving speed. I forget what it was exactly, might have been more of an average at 65, but it was dramatically low. Interestingly, iirc the exception to this was North Dakota. As I recall there were plenty of 70-80mph segments there (still low,…

[deleted]

Re: The perils of walking slow: scientists analyze sidewalk rage

#60

Post by Xurinos »

burgerbrain wrote: post #56
Xurinos wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you. However, our opinions on efficient traffic flow are irrelevant for two reasons. First, the only rule of the road generally recognized, followed or not, is the letter of the law. What some random Internet guy thinks should also be a rule of the road, even if he is 100% right, does not matter. As someone else mentioned, that is politics. Second, the key point I have been trying to make in this scenari…

"First, the only rule of the road generally recognized, followed or not, is the letter of the law." I really sincerely hope that you do not have your drivers license, because that is incredibly wrong.

Now I have a choice. I can get bent out of shape over your highly disrespectful statement (you could have expressed that in a much more civilized manner), I can try to elaborate, or I can ignore you and move on with my day.
Post reply on HN