this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2023
329 points (83.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

9821 readers
5 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I saw a good article on c/upliftingnews about AI improving traffic signal controllers. It's good and all, I just can't help but think of the "look at what they need to have a fraction of our power" meme while reading it

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Aren't bikes also required to stop at red lights?

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yes, but you don't need lights if there are only bikes. Lights are there to prevent heavy vehicles from colliding. If there are no heavy vehicles, then the lights aren't needed.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

Also since bikes take up less space more can cross in the same time

[–] jungle 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So you're ok with getting hit by another bike (or several) when you go through an intersection.

Unless you live in a small town, if everyone used bikes, city centre intersections would be mostly mountains of crashed bikes and people trying to get out of that mess while more bikes continue to pile on.

[–] Tom_0334 20 points 1 year ago (12 children)

All green on a large car intersection: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIqCei97M74

Intersection designed for bikes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RQrKP9a0XE

People on bikes naturally avoid and communicate with each other non-verbally.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I live in the Netherlands. There are so many bikes there is traffic jams out of bikes, there are piles of bikes everywhere.

No, you don't need traffic lights for bikes, only if there are high speed heavy vehicles. I wouldn't even say it's just the heaviness, it's the heaviness coupled with speed that makes them necessary.

[–] jungle 3 points 1 year ago

Ok, I need to experience this myself, but I'll take your word for it.

I was just thinking of the normal speed I cycle at when going to work, which is 25 - 30 km/h, and can't imagine that not causing issues on intersections if there were no red lights.

Of course the answer is to slow down at intersections :)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Yes, but depending on the locality they may only need to treat it as a stop sign (and can proceed if it’s clear) instead of waiting for a green.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not always (which I'll mention in a moment) but:

  • The trivial point was; car wait times are reduced when there are less cars.
  • The main point is; even from a bike perspective its not about stopping/not-stopping, it's about wait time. I have NEVER had so many bikes in front of me that I missed the cross-walk signal and had to wait a whole other red-light cycle. Comparatively I regularly have that happen to me in a car. Idk if its a 30% improvement but its less time waiting at red lights.
  • Finally, technically no, bikes don't always have to (legally) wait at red lights. This is only a technicallity but some crosswalks, like several in my town (or the iconic one in Japan), we get the walk signal on red. My town is also unusual by officially allowing bikes on pedestrian paths. So bikes can legally cross on red.
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Nurse_Robot 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Alright, blocking this community. It's getting to be a bit of a pessimistic vacuum chamber, which is one of the reasons I was okay abandoning Reddit.

Good message overall. Good luck everyone

[–] jeff_hykin 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Sorry if it came across that way, I don't mean it pessimistically. The improvements the article talks about are great.

I just imagine asking random people "Is a 30% reduction in traffic exciting?" And they say "Yes--BUT only if you do it with AI and high-tech stuff Otherwise I couldn't care less".

Imagining that kind of response is hilarious to me.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What did you expect from a community called "fuck_cars"?

[–] jeff_hykin 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I mean I actually kinda agree with them. I don't like vacuum chambers and some of the stuff on here really does ignore the practicality of people's situations.

I'm on here for the good arguments and laughs, not getting in so deep that I think everyone can and should sell their car tomorrow.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I own a car and am resentful of the fact that they are pretty much mandatory in my country, but I don't think this community is overly pessimistic or a vacuum chamber.

That said, departure announcements like the one we are talking about here look like attempts to stir up drama rather than attempts at an actual conversation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not a vacuum chamber. All you gotta do is step outside in 99% the USA to get the other aide of the story, as we all do every day

[–] EatYouWell 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Do you know what a vacuum chamber is?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, and internet communities don't exist at 0 psi

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

In a vacuum chamber, no-one can hear your internet arguments...

(hey guys I think you meant echo chamber)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cosmicrookie 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bikes also have to stop at traffic lights.

[–] HexesofVexes 3 points 1 year ago

Shh, you're not supposed to tell them that!

[–] Hildegarde 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Improving traffic lights doesn't require AI, you just need sensors and some basic code to respond accordingly.

Most lights in the us run on a cycle without accounting for traffic at all. Most don't even take into account the time of day.

Car dependent design is bad. But the us can't even do car dependency well. You have to constantly wait at a light to leave the intersection clear for no one.

The solution is not AI the solution is having people responsible who care at least somewhat.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So I do reinforcement learning research at my university, and the coworker I sit next to everyday does traffic signal optimization using multi agent reinforcement learning and simulation. (E.g. his reseach is on stuff like this paper)

And we literally agree with you; sensors are THE problem for 90% of the inefficiency. Its rare to even know how many cars pass through in a day, or whether its 1 or 500 cars waiting at a light. However, Google knows (or can approximate), which is partially why they and they alone can get something like 30% improvement.

The other 10% inefficiemcy is coordination stuff though, which can be more difficult than you might think to fix.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

outside the rush hours that is true.

in the rush hours it gets tricky because of effects like a light turning green, but traffic being jammed from a red light before. For these you need a network model and it is crazy complicated to adequately model and optimise even just a small street network.

So yeah, best solution is to reduce car traffic as a whole.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No one mention on how this AI would treat peatons or if they even know they exists at all. Stop measuring traffic by speed and throughput and start measuring safety.

[–] EatYouWell 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then roundabouts need to be used instead of red lights.

[–] jungle 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Absolutely. After moving from a roundabout-less country to Ireland, I wish every red light was replaced with one. The only drawback is that they're more complicated than red lights and many people don't know how to use them properly (or don't care).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe we shpuld start training drivers more rigorously then.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And they take up a lot more space than traffic lights.

The trade off for improved traffic flow is worth it unless space is at a premium, which tends to be the case in high density cities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Sao Paulo have a lot of them on the middle of some high density neighborhoods, they work great as traffic calm measures because you can't blast though a street because they are a roundabout on each intersection.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DoomBot5 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ah yes, the bike riders that think they don't have to obey road laws. Very powerful.

[–] jeff_hykin 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

At least in my town the cross-walk sign is on while the light is still red (and bikes are officially allowed to follow pedestrian rules in my town, which is usual for the US). So kinda yeah, they do get to ignore vehicular road laws.

[–] EatYouWell 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It greatly varies by state. In mine they are supposed to follow the same rules as automobiles.

[–] kamenlady 2 points 1 year ago

Same here in Germany. One noteworthy exception though... Like, they are allowed to drive in both directions on a one way only street.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›