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

Donating forks to the dining hall

ben.page

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 231 posts

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#181

Post by practicemaths »

jstanley wrote: post #177
practicemaths wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you're forcing them to break when you merge then that kind of requires a finger imo. Regardless Columbus has a great lack of turn signals and understanding of basic intersection rules.

You're not forced to brake if you can see that 2 lanes go down to 1 and you therefore anticipate that the cars in the other lane are going to have to merge into your lane and you leave a gap to allow them to do so.

If there is an appropriate gap it is fine. However in my experience many people in the zipper lane merge without regard to what the traffic in the lane they're merging into is doing. Thus forcing people to slam on breaks and slows down the overall flow of traffic.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#182

Post by aidenn0 »

gojomo wrote: post #147
Jun8 wrote: post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

See also: 'broken windows theory': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory Though this concept isn't as pat and reliable as in its most-simplistic formulations – you can't fix all crime with aesthetic enforcement – it captures real human tendencies to 'flock' in the space of norms-of-behavior, using visible cues of what will or won't be tolerated. And, it has applicability outside of just literal 'policin…

Yeah, I think Broken Windows Theory takes it a step too far. I believe that if you have an area without graffiti and broken windows, fewer people will graffiti on walls and break windows, but the evidence for that preventing violent crime is flimsy at best.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#183

Post by practicemaths »

CrispyKerosene wrote: post #174
practicemaths wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that sounds like a massive flaw in traffic management design. It's more efficient to develop traffic rules that work in how people are not how they should ideally be.

Brawndo! it's what plants crave. Where do you draw the line though when catering to the uniformed? There is a reason we hire SME's.

You design systems for the way nature works not how you wish nature worked ideally.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#184

Post by SirSourdough »

sircastor wrote: post #159
incanus77 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrast that with Oregon, where everyone will stay in both lanes until one car length short of ten miles.

This is a pet peeve of mine, but also isn't it the most practical? Don't we want the lanes consumed as much as possible so traffic disruptions aren't distributed further back down the road?

Yes and no. If consuming the lanes as much as possible was the goal, we’d be parked bumper to bumper with no available space to move at all.

We want the throughput of the road to be as high as possible. Broadly, that means maintaining the optimal (minimum) spacing to make the merge safely without changing speed, while maximizing speed.

You may get larger areas where speeds are disrupted, but on the average be going faster. Stop-and-go traffic introduces tons of inefficiencies since drivers need to be much more cautious than in a consistent traffic flow.

The big challenge is that it’s basically impossible to know what the optimal speed is, since it relies on knowing the detailed state of the road and traffic volume miles ahead of what you can see.

Self-driving cars are interesting here since they will open up new opportunities for all the vehicles on the road to co-regulate their speed near to the optimum.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#185

Post by jstanley »

practicemaths wrote: post #181
jstanley wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not forced to brake if you can see that 2 lanes go down to 1 and you therefore anticipate that the cars in the other lane are going to have to merge into your lane and you leave a gap to allow them to do so.

If there is an appropriate gap it is fine. However in my experience many people in the zipper lane merge without regard to what the traffic in the lane they're merging into is doing. Thus forcing people to slam on breaks and slows down the overall flow of traffic.

If you don't leave a gap then you're forcing the people in the other lane to slow down and disrupt the flow of traffic.

It is a mistake to think that one of the two input lanes is more entitled to the output lane than the other. 2 lanes go down to 1, neither is more privileged than the other, cars should merge in turn.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#186

Post by sidewndr46 »

bombcar wrote: post #139
Jun8 wrote: post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

They've actually had to try to make people more of a jerk in the midwest, and instruct them on why the "zipper merge" is NOT bad: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/zippermerge/ Otherwise if there's a sign that says "Left Lane Closed 10 Miles Ahead" everyone will get in the right lane for ten miles .

It is plausibly a more efficient usage if both lanes of traffic are moving.

In practice drivers treat the "zipper merge" as acceptable when the left lane is closed ahead, there is 500 ft of road remaining and traffic in the right lane is already dead stopped. It isn't uncommon to see people approaching at 1.5x - 2x the posted speed limit and trying to "merge" then.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#187

Post by practicemaths »

jstanley wrote: post #185
practicemaths wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is an appropriate gap it is fine. However in my experience many people in the zipper lane merge without regard to what the traffic in the lane they're merging into is doing. Thus forcing people to slam on breaks and slows down the overall flow of traffic.

If you don't leave a gap then you're forcing the people in the other lane to slow down and disrupt the flow of traffic. It is a mistake to think that one of the two input lanes is more entitled to the output lane than the other. 2 lanes go down to 1, neither is more privileged than the other, cars should merge in turn.

If there isn't a gap then don't force a merge. Otherwise you're the one driving unsafely and causing further traffic congestion.

Your comment makes less sense when the merging lane has no one else it as well. That means the car in it that is merging over has plenty of opportunities to merge safely without causing traffic congestion however they don't.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#188

Post by bena »

sircastor wrote: post #159
incanus77 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrast that with Oregon, where everyone will stay in both lanes until one car length short of ten miles.

This is a pet peeve of mine, but also isn't it the most practical? Don't we want the lanes consumed as much as possible so traffic disruptions aren't distributed further back down the road?

Basically, you want both lanes to effectively spread out to where those in one could be placed in the other without overlapping vehicles.

The goal is to have both lanes move slowly, but constantly. To basically have a "1 and 1" progression through the chokepoint: 1 from the left, 1 from the right.

It is a rough balance because you have those who don't want to let others merge at all. And there are those who want to merge at all costs. Both of which violate the "1 and 1" guideline which gives everyone at least the illusion of progress.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#189

Post by dexwiz »

actionfromafar wrote: post #96
dexwiz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many doors have a toggle on the face plate below or above the latch that changes auto lock behavior. But auto lock is good for security. I once had a friend move out of a place in part because he would often get locked out. I showed him how to change this at his move out party.

How thoughtful of you.

Haha, I would have told him ahead of time, but only learned of the reason at the party, after he had packed up his apartment and signed a new lease.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#190

Post by radlad »

bombcar wrote: post #139
Jun8 wrote: post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

They've actually had to try to make people more of a jerk in the midwest, and instruct them on why the "zipper merge" is NOT bad: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/zippermerge/ Otherwise if there's a sign that says "Left Lane Closed 10 Miles Ahead" everyone will get in the right lane for ten miles .

> Otherwise if there's a sign that says "Left Lane Closed 10 Miles Ahead" everyone will get in the right lane for ten miles.

One reason for this is that it only takes one person "policing" from the right lane (i.e. driving down the middle of the road, or worse: swerving out in front of the left lane) to shut down zipper merging.

Post reply on HN