4 ms·

This is fucking ridiculous. Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; why do they all actively attempt to thwart other d

This is fucking ridiculous. Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; why do they all actively attempt to thwart other drivers from getting into the lanes they need?

kazinator 11y ago
That's the competitive reality of driving in congested, urban areas. Drivers who cut in can save a lot of time over the course of a commute. They disrupt traffic flows and delay everyone else. So efficient traffic flows have to be defended. > Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; Yes, and some drivers like, for instance, to pass around 25 other cars who are making the same merge.
- ghaff 11y ago
  Although zipper merges are supposedly more efficient :-) http://arstechnica.com/cars/2014/07/the-beauty-of-zipper-merging-or-why-you-should-drive-ruder/ http://arstechnica.com/cars/2014/07/the-beauty-of-zipper-mer...
  - kazinator 11y ago
    That is completely inapplicable to drivers who are already merged into the correct section of freeway and just want to zig-zag between lanes based on what they think is faster at any moment. If you're not one of these drivers, it benefits your trip time if you prevent their actions by not creating easy opportunities for them to slip in. If you are one of these drivers, it benefits your trip time if you successfully carry out the zig-zagging. To that end, it behooves you not to announce your intended moves. If you do, you reduce your opportunities, because you're relying on those who enable this behavior by letting zig-zagging drivers in. In other words, not-blinking is a rational game strategy.
- superuser2 11y ago
  Okay, maybe we are talking about different things. Skipping a clearly identifiable line is one thing - the driver sees that they could just get in line and decides not to. I am more interested in why you would actively avoid making space when there is no clear way to get into the lane except by finding an open space.
  - kazinator 11y ago
    Because, for one thing, it's not someone's god-given right to move from a lane that is nearly standing still from one that is moving fast. "Gee whiz, I just joined this freeway, and damn it, I'm gonna edge my my way all the way to the fast moving left most lane at practically ninety degrees to the traffic flow."
    - superuser2 11y ago
      If they are just changing lanes to find the one that's fastest at any moment, sure. If their destination is only reachable from that lane then yes, it is their right to use the public roadways regardless of how much it displeases you that you share them with other people.
      - kazinator 11y ago
        > If their destination is only reachable from that lane then ... If there are jerks who don't want to let anyone in front of them in a situation where you're just trying to merge in, it will not help you not to blink; my comments about not blinking as a strategy do not apply. Still, those merge-preventing jerks are acting rationally in their self-interest. If a flow of traffic behaves in such a way that it impedes the ingress of a joining flow, then that flow does in fact reduce its trip time. (The effect on the average trip time for everyone is another matter, which they don't care about, obviously).
- elif 11y ago
  The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.
  - kazinator 11y ago
    > traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. Do they? > You are effectively using aggressive driving Not me, personally. (I ride a bicycle and use transit from time to time, and the occasional rental car on weekends and holidays: out of the vicious rush-hour traffic.) Fact is, if you throw a blinker, there will be those drivers who will reduce gaps and not let you in. Usually not in merge situations (as in, you can't join this freeway, bugger off!) but situations in where the lane change is not necessary (you're not entitled to swerve into this lane just because it's moving faster!). I agree with them; they are doing the right thing. It can usually be done safely, within the "two second rule" for following another vehicle, depending on speed. Be it right or wrong, safe or unsafe, if you want to outwit those who are doing it, you have to do the wrong thing an not blink. Not letting people join a freeway is despicable. (It happens too: "Hey, you can merge here ... just not in front of me, thank you very much!") The do-not-blink principle does not apply there, because it's obvious that you want to merge whether you blink or not, being in a merging lane and all! My comments don't apply to that situation at all.
    - elif 11y ago
      I'm not sure I'm understanding your position very well. Are you saying that people exiting the slow lanes to enter the "moving lane" constitutes a hazard, and by punishing those actors by not letting them in, you are minimizing that hazard? If so, i'm inclined to agree philosophically. However, I don't believe anyone should impose their philosophy with 2 tons of steel. RE: traffic science, here are some references http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/0307277194/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1458019698 http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/03072... http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-dont-hate-the-sidezoomer.html http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-d...
elif 11y ago
I don't think it's about time or efficiency at all. I think it has to do with perceived fairness and our self-righteous culture. The faster-moving disappearing lane gets an inherent advantage, which could have been renounced by merging too early. People feel cheated. The problem is that, objectively, people merging all over the place creates more traffic than a uniform zipper merge so we all suffer. In reality, the laws are very explicit (at least in GA where I live), and the person merging has priority. Anyone in an existing lane when a lane disappears is legally required to yield. Additionally, everyone is entitled to this same advantage so it's really not unfair at all.
- kazinator 11y ago
  > at least in GA where I live [...] the person merging has priority [...] anyone in an existing lane when a lane disappears is legally required to yield. That sounds so crazy and contrary to everywhere I've been in the civilized world that I refuse to believe it (as you have written it) without some chapter and verse citation from the GA traffic code. If it is literally true, it means that in GA, I can drive down a merge ramp and not even look at what is coming down the freeway; they have to hit their brakes or swerve to adjust to what I'm doing. I'm in a merge lane, which ends, and thus I have priority over anyone in an existing lane that isn't ending! Any special rules about making it mandatory to let merging vehicles in have to be somehow crafted to they only apply to the obvious situations that they are intended for. Or they have to apply in special places where signage clearly indicates that two flows are merging such that neither has the right of way. For instance the "Form 1 Lane" traffic sign or whatever. "Form 1 lane" effectively means both lanes are ending, and a new one is starting with equal priority access.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- cgriswald 11y ago
  Relevant code: http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-40/chapter-6/article-4/40-6-73/ http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-40/chapter-6/... "The driver of a vehicle about to enter or cross a roadway from any place other than another roadway shall yield the right of way to all vehicles approaching on the roadway to be entered or crossed." My search suggested highway on ramps are "other than another roadway." Also see: http://www.eregulations.com/georgia/driver/laws-governing-right-of-way/ http://www.eregulations.com/georgia/driver/laws-governing-ri... "If you are about to enter or cross a highway from an alley, private road or highway, you must stop and yield the right-of-way to all other pedestrians and vehicles already traveling on the roadway or sidewalk you are entering or crossing;"

kazinator 11y ago

That's the competitive reality of driving in congested, urban areas. Drivers who cut in can save a lot of time over the course of a commute. They disrupt traffic flows and delay everyone else. So efficient traffic flows have to be defended. > Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; Yes, and some drivers like, for instance, to pass around 25 other cars who are making the same merge.

ghaff 11y ago
Although zipper merges are supposedly more efficient :-) http://arstechnica.com/cars/2014/07/the-beauty-of-zipper-merging-or-why-you-should-drive-ruder/ http://arstechnica.com/cars/2014/07/the-beauty-of-zipper-mer...
- kazinator 11y ago
  That is completely inapplicable to drivers who are already merged into the correct section of freeway and just want to zig-zag between lanes based on what they think is faster at any moment. If you're not one of these drivers, it benefits your trip time if you prevent their actions by not creating easy opportunities for them to slip in. If you are one of these drivers, it benefits your trip time if you successfully carry out the zig-zagging. To that end, it behooves you not to announce your intended moves. If you do, you reduce your opportunities, because you're relying on those who enable this behavior by letting zig-zagging drivers in. In other words, not-blinking is a rational game strategy.
superuser2 11y ago
Okay, maybe we are talking about different things. Skipping a clearly identifiable line is one thing - the driver sees that they could just get in line and decides not to. I am more interested in why you would actively avoid making space when there is no clear way to get into the lane except by finding an open space.
- kazinator 11y ago
  Because, for one thing, it's not someone's god-given right to move from a lane that is nearly standing still from one that is moving fast. "Gee whiz, I just joined this freeway, and damn it, I'm gonna edge my my way all the way to the fast moving left most lane at practically ninety degrees to the traffic flow."
  - superuser2 11y ago
    If they are just changing lanes to find the one that's fastest at any moment, sure. If their destination is only reachable from that lane then yes, it is their right to use the public roadways regardless of how much it displeases you that you share them with other people.
    - kazinator 11y ago
      > If their destination is only reachable from that lane then ... If there are jerks who don't want to let anyone in front of them in a situation where you're just trying to merge in, it will not help you not to blink; my comments about not blinking as a strategy do not apply. Still, those merge-preventing jerks are acting rationally in their self-interest. If a flow of traffic behaves in such a way that it impedes the ingress of a joining flow, then that flow does in fact reduce its trip time. (The effect on the average trip time for everyone is another matter, which they don't care about, obviously).
elif 11y ago
The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.
- kazinator 11y ago
  > traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. Do they? > You are effectively using aggressive driving Not me, personally. (I ride a bicycle and use transit from time to time, and the occasional rental car on weekends and holidays: out of the vicious rush-hour traffic.) Fact is, if you throw a blinker, there will be those drivers who will reduce gaps and not let you in. Usually not in merge situations (as in, you can't join this freeway, bugger off!) but situations in where the lane change is not necessary (you're not entitled to swerve into this lane just because it's moving faster!). I agree with them; they are doing the right thing. It can usually be done safely, within the "two second rule" for following another vehicle, depending on speed. Be it right or wrong, safe or unsafe, if you want to outwit those who are doing it, you have to do the wrong thing an not blink. Not letting people join a freeway is despicable. (It happens too: "Hey, you can merge here ... just not in front of me, thank you very much!") The do-not-blink principle does not apply there, because it's obvious that you want to merge whether you blink or not, being in a merging lane and all! My comments don't apply to that situation at all.
  - elif 11y ago
    I'm not sure I'm understanding your position very well. Are you saying that people exiting the slow lanes to enter the "moving lane" constitutes a hazard, and by punishing those actors by not letting them in, you are minimizing that hazard? If so, i'm inclined to agree philosophically. However, I don't believe anyone should impose their philosophy with 2 tons of steel. RE: traffic science, here are some references http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/0307277194/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1458019698 http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/03072... http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-dont-hate-the-sidezoomer.html http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-d...

elif 11y ago

I don't think it's about time or efficiency at all. I think it has to do with perceived fairness and our self-righteous culture. The faster-moving disappearing lane gets an inherent advantage, which could have been renounced by merging too early. People feel cheated. The problem is that, objectively, people merging all over the place creates more traffic than a uniform zipper merge so we all suffer. In reality, the laws are very explicit (at least in GA where I live), and the person merging has priority. Anyone in an existing lane when a lane disappears is legally required to yield. Additionally, everyone is entitled to this same advantage so it's really not unfair at all.

kazinator 11y ago
> at least in GA where I live [...] the person merging has priority [...] anyone in an existing lane when a lane disappears is legally required to yield. That sounds so crazy and contrary to everywhere I've been in the civilized world that I refuse to believe it (as you have written it) without some chapter and verse citation from the GA traffic code. If it is literally true, it means that in GA, I can drive down a merge ramp and not even look at what is coming down the freeway; they have to hit their brakes or swerve to adjust to what I'm doing. I'm in a merge lane, which ends, and thus I have priority over anyone in an existing lane that isn't ending! Any special rules about making it mandatory to let merging vehicles in have to be somehow crafted to they only apply to the obvious situations that they are intended for. Or they have to apply in special places where signage clearly indicates that two flows are merging such that neither has the right of way. For instance the "Form 1 Lane" traffic sign or whatever. "Form 1 lane" effectively means both lanes are ending, and a new one is starting with equal priority access.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
cgriswald 11y ago
Relevant code: http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-40/chapter-6/article-4/40-6-73/ http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-40/chapter-6/... "The driver of a vehicle about to enter or cross a roadway from any place other than another roadway shall yield the right of way to all vehicles approaching on the roadway to be entered or crossed." My search suggested highway on ramps are "other than another roadway." Also see: http://www.eregulations.com/georgia/driver/laws-governing-right-of-way/ http://www.eregulations.com/georgia/driver/laws-governing-ri... "If you are about to enter or cross a highway from an alley, private road or highway, you must stop and yield the right-of-way to all other pedestrians and vehicles already traveling on the roadway or sidewalk you are entering or crossing;"