6 ms·

We need to limit speed and the amount of interactions between cars and pedestrians. This will necessarily be at the expense of the drivers who will have to driv

We need to limit speed and the amount of interactions between cars and pedestrians. This will necessarily be at the expense of the drivers who will have to drive slower and get less space since they have historically been prioritized. It is much easier to implement the necessary measures (against the will of many drivers) if it is clear that drivers run over people, not that people accidentally end up under cars.

dymk 5y ago
I agree that roads need lower speed-limits and to be made safer by their geometry. That's done by reporting on the unsafe conditions of the road. It does no good to play this game of rhetoric, reframing the matter so the driver is at fault (which is not always the case). A driver does not decide to not run over a person because they think a news story will be more accusatory of them.
- Zak 5y ago
  What I remember reading about the impact of speed limits is that reducing them only affects the slowest quartile or so of drivers while changes to road design such as reducing road width and visibility slow down almost all drivers. Reducing the speed of some drivers and not others increases aggressive driving and probably isn't good for safety. I don't take the position that reducing speed is a good answer for every high-risk road situation, but for those where it is, changing the speed limit alone is likely a poor solution.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    > reducing them only affects the slowest quartile or so of drivers And having to navigate traffic that is not of a homogeneous speed creates cognitive load for all drivers. So then they don't notice things like cyclists and pedestrians.
    - calt 5y ago
      That makes no sense. Mixed use and mixed speed creates an environment where drivers have to notice diversity of traffic, including cyclists and pedestrians.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - rtlfe 5y ago
    > I don't take the position that reducing speed is a good answer for every high-risk road situation Why not? There's clear evidence showing that crashes at higher speeds are much more deadly. IMO any street that allows pedestrians and bicycles should be designed for 20mph car traffic. If you want to drive faster than that, do it on a limited-access highway.
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      There are multiple solutions to your 20mph car traffic restriction, one of which is “disallow bicycles and pedestrians on this stretch of pavement”.
    - Zak 5y ago
      Limiting access to the road, e.g. using pedestrian overpasses, fencing, segregated sidewalks and bike lanes, etc... is among the options I had in mind. I don't think one solution fits every problematic road.
- Bermion 5y ago
  Roads aren't badly designed because no one has "reported" them. Improving roads for pedestrians needs to be a priority for politicians, instead of convenient commuting by cars. And for that to happen, voters need to see the world like it is: drivers run over pedestrians.
aclarry 5y ago
But the solution that comes out of that framing is to somehow shame drivers into being better, as opposed to making roads better.
- eli 5y ago
  Blaming the driver starts the root cause analysis in a different direction than blaming the pedestrian.
  - dymk 5y ago
    Neither solve the root problem - poor road design
    - SkeuomorphicBee 5y ago
      Poor road design is mainly a political problem. We know how to make good roads, on the technical side it is a "solved problem", but we lack the political will to do it. So setting the proper framing did solve the root problem
      - dymk 5y ago
        Then target leadership. They're the ones responsible for building better roads (which is the whole advertised purpose of this project!). Writing an NLP bot that rewords articles to blame the driver 100% of the time is nothing but an exercise in getting a nice revenge dopamine rush. But drivers aren't the ones building roads.
        trytophan 5y ago
        Leadership (politicians) respond to public sentiment and attitudes held by their constituents. They're not going to build safer streets, despite the benefits and means to do so, without the political will of citizens. Shifting the way the public perceives fatal car crashes would compel more people to bring up the issue with their local leaders and gather the momentum needed for such changes.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

dymk 5y ago

I agree that roads need lower speed-limits and to be made safer by their geometry. That's done by reporting on the unsafe conditions of the road. It does no good to play this game of rhetoric, reframing the matter so the driver is at fault (which is not always the case). A driver does not decide to not run over a person because they think a news story will be more accusatory of them.

Zak 5y ago
What I remember reading about the impact of speed limits is that reducing them only affects the slowest quartile or so of drivers while changes to road design such as reducing road width and visibility slow down almost all drivers. Reducing the speed of some drivers and not others increases aggressive driving and probably isn't good for safety. I don't take the position that reducing speed is a good answer for every high-risk road situation, but for those where it is, changing the speed limit alone is likely a poor solution.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  > reducing them only affects the slowest quartile or so of drivers And having to navigate traffic that is not of a homogeneous speed creates cognitive load for all drivers. So then they don't notice things like cyclists and pedestrians.
  - calt 5y ago
    That makes no sense. Mixed use and mixed speed creates an environment where drivers have to notice diversity of traffic, including cyclists and pedestrians.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- rtlfe 5y ago
  > I don't take the position that reducing speed is a good answer for every high-risk road situation Why not? There's clear evidence showing that crashes at higher speeds are much more deadly. IMO any street that allows pedestrians and bicycles should be designed for 20mph car traffic. If you want to drive faster than that, do it on a limited-access highway.
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    There are multiple solutions to your 20mph car traffic restriction, one of which is “disallow bicycles and pedestrians on this stretch of pavement”.
  - Zak 5y ago
    Limiting access to the road, e.g. using pedestrian overpasses, fencing, segregated sidewalks and bike lanes, etc... is among the options I had in mind. I don't think one solution fits every problematic road.
Bermion 5y ago
Roads aren't badly designed because no one has "reported" them. Improving roads for pedestrians needs to be a priority for politicians, instead of convenient commuting by cars. And for that to happen, voters need to see the world like it is: drivers run over pedestrians.

aclarry 5y ago

But the solution that comes out of that framing is to somehow shame drivers into being better, as opposed to making roads better.

eli 5y ago
Blaming the driver starts the root cause analysis in a different direction than blaming the pedestrian.
- dymk 5y ago
  Neither solve the root problem - poor road design
  - SkeuomorphicBee 5y ago
    Poor road design is mainly a political problem. We know how to make good roads, on the technical side it is a "solved problem", but we lack the political will to do it. So setting the proper framing did solve the root problem
    - dymk 5y ago
      Then target leadership. They're the ones responsible for building better roads (which is the whole advertised purpose of this project!). Writing an NLP bot that rewords articles to blame the driver 100% of the time is nothing but an exercise in getting a nice revenge dopamine rush. But drivers aren't the ones building roads.
      - trytophan 5y ago
        Leadership (politicians) respond to public sentiment and attitudes held by their constituents. They're not going to build safer streets, despite the benefits and means to do so, without the political will of citizens. Shifting the way the public perceives fatal car crashes would compel more people to bring up the issue with their local leaders and gather the momentum needed for such changes.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]