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

How we can reduce traffic congestion

research.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 373 posts

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#141

Post by [deleted] »

teeray wrote: post #10
dtgriscom wrote: post #4

Traffic apps only know about congestion if someone running the app goes down the congested road. Because of this, I've always suspected that the apps, from time to time, will route someone down a route they haven't gathered data on in a while, just to collect the data, and even if the route is likely to be suboptimal.

I wonder this same thing when I’ve been routed completely asinine ways off interstates at night when traffic appears calm. I always have to play the game of “is there horrendous traffic ahead from night paving / accident, or am I being conscripted as a traffic sensor robot?”

[deleted]

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#142

Post by ryan_lane »

rootusrootus wrote: post #104
ryan_lane wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take the revenue generated from congestion pricing, and put it into public transportation. Make public transportation free to use. That would be far more impactful to the folks least able to bear an increase in driving fees. In most of the US, people are forced to own cars because they don't have public transit available, or the available public transit is too infrequent, or there aren't dense enough routes. The reas…

> Why is it fair for public transit riders to have to pay per ride In my city public transit fares only cover something like 10% of the cost. Isn’t that fairly typical? > car owners get to use the infrastructure for free Every place I’ve lived charges a fuel tax to pay for roads.

> In my city public transit fares only cover something like 10% of the cost. Isn’t that fairly typical?

Sure, but the budget for transit is also extremely tight, especially compared to car infrastructure.

If only 10% of the costs are covered, that's even more motivation to not charge fees at all, right? Why impose that burden? More people riding public transit means less cars on the road, and less traffic, which is good for everyone.

> charges a fuel tax to pay for roads

For the most part fuel taxes haven't increased to cover the costs of roads (it hasn't increased with inflation at all, federally), and they typically cover highways. Recently, a number of places have been looking at pausing or removing fuel taxes to reduce costs of fuel, due to the Iran war. Most states cover the cost of roads primarily through their general funds.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#143

Post by HNisCIS »

xnx wrote: post #125
bravoetch wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article and didn't see anywhere if they collaborated with city planners, or just ran this on their own. I get the techno-optimism of making traffic 'better' and also it may be concerning if trucks are being routed through neighborhoods where planners didn't build for it.

City planners and zoning have been a disaster for US cities.

That's not what the parent is talking about. You're using the strawman of what appears to be occupancy zoning or something similar to argue that a techno fascists should have free reign to manipulate the mass movements of people within a city for their own purposes.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#145

Post by HNisCIS »

_vertigo wrote: post #120
bravoetch wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article and didn't see anywhere if they collaborated with city planners, or just ran this on their own. I get the techno-optimism of making traffic 'better' and also it may be concerning if trucks are being routed through neighborhoods where planners didn't build for it.

Do you think Google should get government sign-off on every change to its routing algorithm?

Medical/psychological experiments involving human subjects are mandated by federal law to run through a review board. Did that happen here? This isn't a medical experiment, but I don't think its nuts to feel like maybe there should have been some oversight.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#146

Post by bbkane »

cozzyd wrote: post #144

cool, now can you stop randomly having my google maps app go dim and dark as I'm biking making it impossible for me to see what I'm supposed to do next?

Not an exact solution, but you can set it so it tells you upcoming turns and directions. With that I haven't needed to look at the screen much

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#147

Post by refurb »

ctkhn wrote: post #52

Surely the top way to avoid traffic congestion would be communities where it's possible to live near where you work, shop, go out, etc. and not doing everything else exactly the same but taking a slightly different highway in your car

That seems like an impossible task in today’s world of layoffs and needing to jump jobs to get pay raises.

You could live where you work and suddenly your next job is a 30 min drive away.

How could you ensure that enough companies existing within a 10 mile radius to provided varied employment to all the residents?

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#148

Post by nhinck2 »

cyberax wrote: post #73
financetechbro wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have stats to support your statement?

Sure. Pedestrian deaths are above the 2015 levels in all the large West Coast cities that went full-on with the Zero Vision project. Numbers are for 2015 and 2025. Seattle: 7/18 Portland: 11/20 LA: 130/150 SF is unchanged at 24 (they had a HUGE drop from 2024, luckily). And no, the following excuses do not apply: COVID - deaths started growing _before_ COVID. Car size increase - cars did not increase significantly du…

Pedestrian deaths are up all across the the US.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#149

Post by kaonwarb »

HNisCIS wrote: post #145
_vertigo wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think Google should get government sign-off on every change to its routing algorithm?

Medical/psychological experiments involving human subjects are mandated by federal law to run through a review board. Did that happen here? This isn't a medical experiment, but I don't think its nuts to feel like maybe there should have been some oversight.

I fear you may overestimate the median benefit of government oversight.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#150

Post by lwansbrough »

Aurornis wrote: post #76
ctkhn wrote: post #52

Surely the top way to avoid traffic congestion would be communities where it's possible to live near where you work, shop, go out, etc. and not doing everything else exactly the same but taking a slightly different highway in your car

This is possible if you’re not picky about where you live, where you work, your career options, how crowded your local vicinity is, or how much you pay for your residence. The more your preferences or financial constraints come into play, the more you have to give up. Most people settle in for driving because it allows them to pick from more job options than those that happen to be located near their house and more h…

This is like, a post-hoc rationalization.

Most jobs, not all, can take place inside a city. If you build your cities densely, people can live and work within the city and have all their needs met without the need for a car (see: the great cities of the world)

If you design economic hubs properly, businesses can be located within reach of homes without the need for cars.

If you instead prioritize the need for, I don’t know, a monoculture lawn and separation from lower class people, then you’re choosing to build suburbs. Once a city has built enough suburbs, businesses become out of reach without the use of a car.

Post reply on HN