5 ms·

This is really dangerous. People used to not using the buttons during the day may not remember to use them at night. They may not even be able to see the label

This is really dangerous. People used to not using the buttons during the day may not remember to use them at night. They may not even be able to see the labels at night, since (unlike any actual road sign, at least in the US) they aren't even retroreflective. This is likely to cause confusion, leading people to cross without a walk signal. So this will disproportionately endanger people walking at night--which is already the peak time for driver-inflicted fatalities.

nhinck2 4y ago
This is pearl clutching of the highest order. If they can't see the labels at night so what? They use their daytime experience of expecting it to be automatic and wait awkwardly for nothing... or they push the button and the light changes eventually.
- jasonhansel 4y ago
  The issue is that people won't "wait awkwardly for nothing" forever. If someone can't see the label and is used to having it change automatically, they're likely to assume that the signal just "isn't working," causing them to cross without a walk signal. IMHO the biggest problem here is that the label doesn't meet the usual standards for road/pedestrian signage. In particular, "real" road signs are retroreflective so that you can see them easily under streetlights (or in car headlights). This is particularly important for signs that are only relevant at night. (Semipermanent signs should be made of a sufficiently durable material, which this...is not.)
  - roxgib 4y ago
    But if you don't see the label the default assumption will be 'I need to press this button to cross', so they'll just press it for nothing during the day, which is hardly that bad.
    - asdajksah2123 4y ago
      Most of the world doesn't have these ridiculous buttons. A large number of people wouldn't expect to even ever having to press a button to get a pedestrian light. Most of Australia also doesn't have these buttons as far as I'm aware. So that's not most likely to be the default assumption at all.
      - Schroedingersat 4y ago
        All of australia has beg buttons. Some of them were disabled during covid.
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    > causing them to cross without a walk signal. SURELY one always looks out for traffic, even if it is green for you!
    - jasonhansel 4y ago
      So: 1. At intersections with "leading pedestrian intervals" or "exclusive pedestrian phasing," walk signals provide unique safety benefits that reduce the risks posed by oncoming traffic. 2. This can be important: due to road geometry or other obstructions, it can be hard to see oncoming traffic from a distance, especially for the visually impaired. 3. Blind pedestrians can hear audible walk signals, but cannot see oncoming traffic at all. 4. At sufficiently complex intersections, it can be impossible for you to tell whether stopped cars are about to come towards you when a light changes. 5. Most importantly: walk signs usually tell you how soon a light will change, so that you don't start walking just before a light change. This is why walk signals reduce car-related fatalities, particularly at night, when people are most at risk.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - nhinck2 4y ago
        The sign and audio cues aren't being disabled, only the button.
lozenge 4y ago
At every hour of the day people have to wait for a walk signal. Nobody is just randomly walking into the road and trusting "the system" to stop cars for them.
- kuhewa 4y ago
  I guess it's possible you could take that first step if you are watching the orthogonal street light and attempting to preempt the pedestrian green, which never comes and instead you could be jaywalking into the path of a car that is turning.
- recursive 4y ago
  After waiting, if the walk signal never happens, they might walk out onto the road at that point. Not sure where "trusting the system" is coming from.
  - alar44 4y ago
    So what?
    - recursive 4y ago
      So the fact that people are waiting for a signal at all times of the day isn't the issue. The issue is that, at certain times of day, after waiting, the signal is not forthcoming.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  > Nobody is just randomly walking into the road and trusting "the system" to stop cars for them. From observation, quite a few people do. Once modern cars with automatic braking become common, probably most people will
  - vkou 4y ago
    > From observation, quite a few people do. They do it because they don't give a shit about traffic signaling, period. They are the same kinds of people who run red lights. They don't do it because they think that somehow stepping into the road is going to magically activate the 'WALK' light.
MollyRealized 4y ago
I agree with this commenter and disagree with those calling it 'pearl-clutching.' If I have learned one thing in my life with regard to user interaction, it is to expect people to make mistakes and to do counter to what you would expect. This is especially important when life is on the line.
- nhinck2 4y ago
  There must be some disconnect here. What mistake do you think road crossers are going to make because of this change?
  - stephen_g 4y ago
    Yeah, I really don’t get it either. Extra context for anybody not from Australia - somebody basically always needed to press the beg button to cross at any intersection with signals for about as long as anybody has been alive. They temporarily changed it during COVID so you didn’t need to touch it. Now it’s going back to how it always was. This already happened months ago in my city, I hardly even noticed.
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    "Traffic going the same way as me has a green light but the pedestrian signal didn't come on. Guess it must be broken so I have to cross without it." It's a reasonable assumption because you don't need to push the button to get a pedestrian signal unless the intersection was designed by a carbrain.
kuhewa 4y ago
I think if you thought through this a little further you would realise it doesn't follow. No one is just walking into an intersection as if the 60 second timing cycle is their circadian rhythm. There are also hard to miss sounds queues that go with the pedestrian signals. There are no shortage of city intersections worldwide where the buttons are placebo and people b manage just fine.
destroy-2A 4y ago
Most people walking past 10pm in the Sydney cbd, have had a few drinks anyway so guaranteed to cause confusion and increase j walking. Also the ambient noise detection does not work at all, I live at ground floor and can hear a nearby one and another one over 200 meters away clearly during summer night when I keep the windows open. the council turned it off completely after much complaining
ndsipa_pomu 4y ago
> So this will disproportionately endanger people walking at night--which is already the peak time for driver-inflicted fatalities. Any stats on that? I thought that daytime tends to have more total incidents, but that is usually when the amount of traffic peaks too. Edit: From https://www.lhd.com.au/lhd-insights/australian-road-death-statistics/ https://www.lhd.com.au/lhd-insights/australian-road-death-st... it would appear that 3-4pm in the afternoon is the most dangerous time. Peak traffic and possible fatigue effects.

nhinck2 4y ago

This is pearl clutching of the highest order. If they can't see the labels at night so what? They use their daytime experience of expecting it to be automatic and wait awkwardly for nothing... or they push the button and the light changes eventually.

jasonhansel 4y ago
The issue is that people won't "wait awkwardly for nothing" forever. If someone can't see the label and is used to having it change automatically, they're likely to assume that the signal just "isn't working," causing them to cross without a walk signal. IMHO the biggest problem here is that the label doesn't meet the usual standards for road/pedestrian signage. In particular, "real" road signs are retroreflective so that you can see them easily under streetlights (or in car headlights). This is particularly important for signs that are only relevant at night. (Semipermanent signs should be made of a sufficiently durable material, which this...is not.)
- roxgib 4y ago
  But if you don't see the label the default assumption will be 'I need to press this button to cross', so they'll just press it for nothing during the day, which is hardly that bad.
  - asdajksah2123 4y ago
    Most of the world doesn't have these ridiculous buttons. A large number of people wouldn't expect to even ever having to press a button to get a pedestrian light. Most of Australia also doesn't have these buttons as far as I'm aware. So that's not most likely to be the default assumption at all.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      All of australia has beg buttons. Some of them were disabled during covid.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  > causing them to cross without a walk signal. SURELY one always looks out for traffic, even if it is green for you!
  - jasonhansel 4y ago
    So: 1. At intersections with "leading pedestrian intervals" or "exclusive pedestrian phasing," walk signals provide unique safety benefits that reduce the risks posed by oncoming traffic. 2. This can be important: due to road geometry or other obstructions, it can be hard to see oncoming traffic from a distance, especially for the visually impaired. 3. Blind pedestrians can hear audible walk signals, but cannot see oncoming traffic at all. 4. At sufficiently complex intersections, it can be impossible for you to tell whether stopped cars are about to come towards you when a light changes. 5. Most importantly: walk signs usually tell you how soon a light will change, so that you don't start walking just before a light change. This is why walk signals reduce car-related fatalities, particularly at night, when people are most at risk.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - nhinck2 4y ago
      The sign and audio cues aren't being disabled, only the button.

lozenge 4y ago

At every hour of the day people have to wait for a walk signal. Nobody is just randomly walking into the road and trusting "the system" to stop cars for them.

kuhewa 4y ago
I guess it's possible you could take that first step if you are watching the orthogonal street light and attempting to preempt the pedestrian green, which never comes and instead you could be jaywalking into the path of a car that is turning.
recursive 4y ago
After waiting, if the walk signal never happens, they might walk out onto the road at that point. Not sure where "trusting the system" is coming from.
- alar44 4y ago
  So what?
  - recursive 4y ago
    So the fact that people are waiting for a signal at all times of the day isn't the issue. The issue is that, at certain times of day, after waiting, the signal is not forthcoming.
Gigachad 4y ago
> Nobody is just randomly walking into the road and trusting "the system" to stop cars for them. From observation, quite a few people do. Once modern cars with automatic braking become common, probably most people will
- vkou 4y ago
  > From observation, quite a few people do. They do it because they don't give a shit about traffic signaling, period. They are the same kinds of people who run red lights. They don't do it because they think that somehow stepping into the road is going to magically activate the 'WALK' light.

MollyRealized 4y ago

I agree with this commenter and disagree with those calling it 'pearl-clutching.' If I have learned one thing in my life with regard to user interaction, it is to expect people to make mistakes and to do counter to what you would expect. This is especially important when life is on the line.

nhinck2 4y ago
There must be some disconnect here. What mistake do you think road crossers are going to make because of this change?
- stephen_g 4y ago
  Yeah, I really don’t get it either. Extra context for anybody not from Australia - somebody basically always needed to press the beg button to cross at any intersection with signals for about as long as anybody has been alive. They temporarily changed it during COVID so you didn’t need to touch it. Now it’s going back to how it always was. This already happened months ago in my city, I hardly even noticed.
- TheCoelacanth 4y ago
  "Traffic going the same way as me has a green light but the pedestrian signal didn't come on. Guess it must be broken so I have to cross without it." It's a reasonable assumption because you don't need to push the button to get a pedestrian signal unless the intersection was designed by a carbrain.

kuhewa 4y ago

I think if you thought through this a little further you would realise it doesn't follow. No one is just walking into an intersection as if the 60 second timing cycle is their circadian rhythm. There are also hard to miss sounds queues that go with the pedestrian signals. There are no shortage of city intersections worldwide where the buttons are placebo and people b manage just fine.

destroy-2A 4y ago

Most people walking past 10pm in the Sydney cbd, have had a few drinks anyway so guaranteed to cause confusion and increase j walking. Also the ambient noise detection does not work at all, I live at ground floor and can hear a nearby one and another one over 200 meters away clearly during summer night when I keep the windows open. the council turned it off completely after much complaining

ndsipa_pomu 4y ago

> So this will disproportionately endanger people walking at night--which is already the peak time for driver-inflicted fatalities. Any stats on that? I thought that daytime tends to have more total incidents, but that is usually when the amount of traffic peaks too. Edit: From https://www.lhd.com.au/lhd-insights/australian-road-death-statistics/ https://www.lhd.com.au/lhd-insights/australian-road-death-st... it would appear that 3-4pm in the afternoon is the most dangerous time. Peak traffic and possible fatigue effects.