3 ms·

My favorite detail in the article was about the intersection with beg buttons, where the robot people were trying to get the city to convert them to a properly

My favorite detail in the article was about the intersection with beg buttons, where the robot people were trying to get the city to convert them to a properly functioning crosswalk that always showed a "walk" when the parallel road had a green light. If this is what it takes to get rid of beg buttons, I say let the robots spread to every corner of the earth.

Solvate8441 3y ago
Automatic sliding doors and sidewalk ramps are also nice to have. It seems robot-friendly infrastructure is pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.
- TMWNN 3y ago
  My apartment building has only steps leading up to the lobby door, which causes problems for deliveries and movers. I've thought of citing handicapped access as the justification for getting the property owner to put in a ramp.
foofie 3y ago
It's disheartening how something as straight-forward as improving a town's walkability and reducing the threat posed by cars is framed as something evil that only a robot-wielding corporation corrupting officials would ever do.
dheera 3y ago
In many cities the "walk" only shows when the cars have a green light AND a red no-left-turn signal, to protect pedestrians from getting hit by left-turning cars. In yet other cities and intersections cars in all directions are stopped and pedestrians in all directions are allowed to go.
NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
It's peculiar, because traffic engineers long ago found several ways to automatically detect when a car is waiting at a red light and trigger the signal change, but they just can't seem to figure out how to detect bicycles or pedestrians who are waiting for the same event.
- jasonpeacock 3y ago
  Because cars on a road have obvious intention and clear rules to follow, but bicyclists/pedestrians on a sidewalk do not. How do you know someone on a sidewalk is waiting to cross vs just stopping while talking to friend, checking their phone, etc? Or that someone walking towards a crosswalk actually intends to cross and isn't going to change direction? You could paint a box on the ground and say "stand here to cross"?
  - ElevenLathe 3y ago
    ...or just light the "WALK" sign when the parallel street gets its green.
    - jasonpeacock 3y ago
      It's not that simple, alas. When the WALK sign is on, there's a minimum time required for pedestrian crossing that has to be allowed. Signals can switch faster and respond to traffic needs more quickly if they don't have to always block waiting for that crossing time. IMO, the ideal solution is you add all-way crossing into every signal cycle. E.g. North/South traffic, then East/West traffic, then all-WALK (unless nobody pressed the WALK button). It's much safer - no worries about right-on-red or un-protected left turns hitting pedestrians, and pedestrians get the more efficient option to cross diagonally.
      - ElevenLathe 3y ago
        It /can/ be that simple, was my point. There's no need to invent a pedestrian sensor at all. In fact, why not have the pedestrian walkways always green, with the automotive signals only activating if traffic is detected?
      - asoneth 3y ago
        The city I live near has walk signs come on automatically, followed about five seconds later by the parallel automobile light. This seems to be standard timing for a Leading Pedestrian Interval[1]. Because this happens in both directions it adds ~10 seconds to a roughly two-minute traffic cycle but it allows people to use the road without a beg button. Certainly this would be a poor tradeoff in rural/suburban areas where most traffic cycles have no pedestrians or cyclists. Those use cases should use beg buttons. But in a city where most traffic cycles include at least one pedestrian or cyclist then it seems like a useful tradeoff to increase convenience and accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists. What's more it may increase automobile efficiency as well: adding a couple Leading Pedestrian Intervals to every traffic cycle takes similar overall time than adding a full Barnes Dance[2] to half the traffic cycles. So if more than half of the traffic cycles include pedestrians crossing then everyone is probably better off with automatic walk signs on a leading pedestrian interval. Of course if the city wants to really encourage walking they can do both and have the beg buttons trigger a Barnes dance for those who are young, old, nervous, or just need extra time to cross. [1] https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/leading-pedestrian-interval https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasure... [2] what you describe above where all walk signs are on and all automobiles are stopped: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble

Solvate8441 3y ago

Automatic sliding doors and sidewalk ramps are also nice to have. It seems robot-friendly infrastructure is pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.

TMWNN 3y ago
My apartment building has only steps leading up to the lobby door, which causes problems for deliveries and movers. I've thought of citing handicapped access as the justification for getting the property owner to put in a ramp.

foofie 3y ago

It's disheartening how something as straight-forward as improving a town's walkability and reducing the threat posed by cars is framed as something evil that only a robot-wielding corporation corrupting officials would ever do.

dheera 3y ago

In many cities the "walk" only shows when the cars have a green light AND a red no-left-turn signal, to protect pedestrians from getting hit by left-turning cars. In yet other cities and intersections cars in all directions are stopped and pedestrians in all directions are allowed to go.

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago

It's peculiar, because traffic engineers long ago found several ways to automatically detect when a car is waiting at a red light and trigger the signal change, but they just can't seem to figure out how to detect bicycles or pedestrians who are waiting for the same event.

jasonpeacock 3y ago
Because cars on a road have obvious intention and clear rules to follow, but bicyclists/pedestrians on a sidewalk do not. How do you know someone on a sidewalk is waiting to cross vs just stopping while talking to friend, checking their phone, etc? Or that someone walking towards a crosswalk actually intends to cross and isn't going to change direction? You could paint a box on the ground and say "stand here to cross"?
- ElevenLathe 3y ago
  ...or just light the "WALK" sign when the parallel street gets its green.
  - jasonpeacock 3y ago
    It's not that simple, alas. When the WALK sign is on, there's a minimum time required for pedestrian crossing that has to be allowed. Signals can switch faster and respond to traffic needs more quickly if they don't have to always block waiting for that crossing time. IMO, the ideal solution is you add all-way crossing into every signal cycle. E.g. North/South traffic, then East/West traffic, then all-WALK (unless nobody pressed the WALK button). It's much safer - no worries about right-on-red or un-protected left turns hitting pedestrians, and pedestrians get the more efficient option to cross diagonally.
    - ElevenLathe 3y ago
      It /can/ be that simple, was my point. There's no need to invent a pedestrian sensor at all. In fact, why not have the pedestrian walkways always green, with the automotive signals only activating if traffic is detected?
    - asoneth 3y ago
      The city I live near has walk signs come on automatically, followed about five seconds later by the parallel automobile light. This seems to be standard timing for a Leading Pedestrian Interval[1]. Because this happens in both directions it adds ~10 seconds to a roughly two-minute traffic cycle but it allows people to use the road without a beg button. Certainly this would be a poor tradeoff in rural/suburban areas where most traffic cycles have no pedestrians or cyclists. Those use cases should use beg buttons. But in a city where most traffic cycles include at least one pedestrian or cyclist then it seems like a useful tradeoff to increase convenience and accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists. What's more it may increase automobile efficiency as well: adding a couple Leading Pedestrian Intervals to every traffic cycle takes similar overall time than adding a full Barnes Dance[2] to half the traffic cycles. So if more than half of the traffic cycles include pedestrians crossing then everyone is probably better off with automatic walk signs on a leading pedestrian interval. Of course if the city wants to really encourage walking they can do both and have the beg buttons trigger a Barnes dance for those who are young, old, nervous, or just need extra time to cross. [1] https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/leading-pedestrian-interval https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasure... [2] what you describe above where all walk signs are on and all automobiles are stopped: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble