How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking” • Hacker News Board

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#131

Post by Spivak » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:19 PM UTC

jablan wrote: post #29

meri_dian wrote: post #24

This is silly. >"Ultimately, both the word jaywalking and the concept that pedestrians shouldn't walk freely on streets became so deeply entrenched that few people know this history" The article makes it seem like the only reason the rules exist as they do now is because some industry players forced us into this situation. No. The rules exist now because the majority of people agreed that cars should be given the roa…

There are ways to move around other than driving, you know...

I'll bite, what are my options for moving distances that are too far to walk, too short to fly, and don't involve vehicles?

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#132

Post by macintux » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:20 PM UTC

logfromblammo wrote: post #89

mlinksva wrote: post #27

Now is an opportunity, perhaps first in ~100 years, perhaps last, to recover the streets for unaugmented humans: slow down cars in urban areas, increase qualifications for humans to drive, eventually ban human drivers entirely, leaving only automated vehicles with enough sensors and going slowly enough to reduce auto-related deaths for pedestrians and passengers alike to zero.

I think the answer to pedestrians versus cars is the same as for cars versus trains: grade separation. Turn the sidewalks into elevated walkways. Or use pedestrian tunnels underneath the road surface. Pedestrian crosswalks are a money-saving measure, ignoring one of the many externalities involved in automobile manufacture. Cars simply should not be driving on pedestrian walkways, and pedestrians should not be walkin…

Elevated walkways? Half my city doesn't even have traditional sidewalks today, who's going to agree to pay to elevate them?

Around my area, people don't walk for pleasure, mostly, they walk because they're too poor for a car and the public transit system is terrible. Forcing them to climb stairs (assuming they're even physically able; a fair number of pedestrians near here are in wheelchairs) to get out of the way of cars is a non-starter.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#133

Post by sharpercoder » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:20 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #103

mlinksva wrote: post #27

Now is an opportunity, perhaps first in ~100 years, perhaps last, to recover the streets for unaugmented humans: slow down cars in urban areas, increase qualifications for humans to drive, eventually ban human drivers entirely, leaving only automated vehicles with enough sensors and going slowly enough to reduce auto-related deaths for pedestrians and passengers alike to zero.

let's make walking and biking cool, but not at the expense of fast personal transport (cars). the best solution isn't to try to slow down the cars but rather to make mixed-use urban areas the default so that walking and biking become the norm. you also get all kinds of other benefits with that (less traffic, healthier air, more fit people, etc) i agree that driving qualifications should be more strict, but probably i…

The concept of jaywalking is great for busy roads with high speed traffic. 30MPH+ (50KMPH+) roads should become much better and faster by reducing the amount of pedestrian crossing significantly.

Slower roads (max 20MPH/30KMPH) should be bicycle and pedestrian-first. Cars there should be "guests" catering to the slower non-motorized traffic.

This way we have the best of both worlds: nice & livable urban roads and faster driving in connecting roads.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#134

Post by gamblor956 » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:20 PM UTC

jrowley wrote: post #116

mieseratte wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot imagine mandatory tracking devices, anonymous or not, ever being mandatory in the United States. That would never fly.

Maybe not mandatory but otherwise you’re liable so your insurance company requires it.

Several states already have laws preventing that requirement. In those states, location-tracking must be opt-in, and must offer an economic benefit to the policyholder.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#135

Post by closeparen » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

ck425 wrote: post #106

briandear wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be chaos. You’d have some jackass walking in the middle of the street as slow as possible, meanwhile people who actually have some place to go are all sitting around waiting on some fool who wants to play hacky-sack in the street.

Then you stop relying on moter transport and start using your legs in cities.

And when the nearest home you can afford is 15 miles away?

Any realistic plan includes high quality public transit, with at least some of it at street level.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#136

Post by MaxBarraclough » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

jdhopeunique wrote: post #46

mlinksva wrote: post #27

Now is an opportunity, perhaps first in ~100 years, perhaps last, to recover the streets for unaugmented humans: slow down cars in urban areas, increase qualifications for humans to drive, eventually ban human drivers entirely, leaving only automated vehicles with enough sensors and going slowly enough to reduce auto-related deaths for pedestrians and passengers alike to zero.

If automated vehicles become popular, I predict new crimes will be added in addition to jaywalking. Cyclists may be restricted and anything else that confuses AI drivers. If certain intersections or sections of road consistently confuse AI drivers, automakers will lobby for ways to change these roadways. I suspect calls for AI regulation by people like Elon Musk are really attempts at regulatory capture to make autom…

> If certain intersections or sections of road consistently confuse AI drivers, automakers will lobby for ways to change these roadways.

I doubt that attitude will ever catch on. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but it seems to me that there's a healthy suspicion about AI drivers.

So far at least, the attitude taken by, well, everyone, is that AI drivers are untrustworthy until proven trustworthy. If AI drivers can't cope with the various challenges of real driving, then the AI drivers are to blame, not the external factors.

If they work well, AI drivers will be permitted to drive. If they do not, they will not be permitted to drive. At no point will they get to dictate what other road-users may do. Our Ludditism will see to that.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#137

Post by dsfyu404ed » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

andys627 wrote: post #78

lawlessone wrote: post #4

What i would like to know is did it actually reduce deaths?

Maybe from cars hitting people - but how about death from obesity and environmental degradation of suburban auto-oriented lifestyle as compared to urban walkable/transit oriented lifestyle.

There have been massive increases in quality of life as a result of cheaper, faster transportation of people and goods.

Anything can be made to look like a massive net negative with the one-sided comparison that it's fashionable to apply to cars, social conservatives, and a handful of other topics around here.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#138

Post by yalph » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:23 PM UTC

jdhopeunique wrote: post #46

mlinksva wrote: post #27

Now is an opportunity, perhaps first in ~100 years, perhaps last, to recover the streets for unaugmented humans: slow down cars in urban areas, increase qualifications for humans to drive, eventually ban human drivers entirely, leaving only automated vehicles with enough sensors and going slowly enough to reduce auto-related deaths for pedestrians and passengers alike to zero.

If automated vehicles become popular, I predict new crimes will be added in addition to jaywalking. Cyclists may be restricted and anything else that confuses AI drivers. If certain intersections or sections of road consistently confuse AI drivers, automakers will lobby for ways to change these roadways. I suspect calls for AI regulation by people like Elon Musk are really attempts at regulatory capture to make autom…

Why cant we get automated bicycles and get rid of the humans on bikes?

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#139

Post by Brakenshire » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:23 PM UTC

jdhopeunique wrote: post #46

mlinksva wrote: post #27

Now is an opportunity, perhaps first in ~100 years, perhaps last, to recover the streets for unaugmented humans: slow down cars in urban areas, increase qualifications for humans to drive, eventually ban human drivers entirely, leaving only automated vehicles with enough sensors and going slowly enough to reduce auto-related deaths for pedestrians and passengers alike to zero.

If automated vehicles become popular, I predict new crimes will be added in addition to jaywalking. Cyclists may be restricted and anything else that confuses AI drivers. If certain intersections or sections of road consistently confuse AI drivers, automakers will lobby for ways to change these roadways. I suspect calls for AI regulation by people like Elon Musk are really attempts at regulatory capture to make autom…

We could end up with roads dedicated to cars being separated from roads dedicated to pedestrians or cyclists. You could imagine if a city was designed from scratch the vehicles could move around almost in tunnel-like back-alleys, with periodic embarkation points into pedestrianized open plazas and boulevards. If Musk's reduction in cost of tunnelling is more than just a pipe-dream, then you might be able to retrofit something like that into an existing city.

But I agree that if autonomous cars come to pass, there will be a lot of pressure to go down the route you discuss.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#140

Post by Balero » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:24 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #109

logfromblammo wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the answer to pedestrians versus cars is the same as for cars versus trains: grade separation. Turn the sidewalks into elevated walkways. Or use pedestrian tunnels underneath the road surface. Pedestrian crosswalks are a money-saving measure, ignoring one of the many externalities involved in automobile manufacture. Cars simply should not be driving on pedestrian walkways, and pedestrians should not be walkin…

put the cars underground, not the pedestrians. let the cars go fast and let the people stroll in the sunshine.

Or the rain...