Waze Wars



  • I've kind of wondered if something like this would happen. I have my own cut throughs that I built via trial and error and looking at maps from before I used Waze. But some of them are too obvious and will sometimes clog up.

    I'm sure I'd be upset if this happened to me, but in the mean time my lawn and I will enjoy our non-through street privilege.



  • @boomzilla Over here this would be somewhat annoying for two reasons:

    a) The smaller streets are not really built for sustaining lots of vehicles and, in conjunction with this,
    b) you actually pay money for paving the street your house is adjacent to (if you are a house owner, of course).


  • SockDev

    @boomzilla said in Waze Wars:

    I've kind of wondered if something like this would happen. I have my own cut throughs that I built via trial and error and looking at maps from before I used Waze. But some of them are too obvious and will sometimes clog up.

    I'm sure I'd be upset if this happened to me, but in the mean time my lawn and I will enjoy our non-through street privilege.

    i have never been happier i live on a cul de sac.



  • @Rhywden said in Waze Wars:

    The smaller streets are not really built for sustaining lots of vehicles and, in conjunction with this,

    TFA talks about a residential street (I think it might even be where the guy in the picture lives) that has cars parked on either side and so there's only a single lane of traffic possible. We have lots of those around here.

    @Rhywden said in Waze Wars:

    you actually pay money for paving the street your house is adjacent to (if you are a house owner, of course).

    Most streets here are publicly maintained, which of course still means that you pay for paving it. My street is actually private and maintained by the HOA, but then like I said, it's not a through street so it's never going to be an issue for me.



  • There are tons of tricks with road layouting that can slow down traffic in a street. Over here the effect is called 'sluipverkeer' (literally 'sneak traffic'), and it's existed for decades. The usual approach is to make the small road slower than the large road even if the large road is backed up, using speed limitations, speed bumps, chicanes, and laying out neighbourhoods such that any route inside the neighbourhood between two entrances is always twisty.



  • @Rhywden said in Waze Wars:

    you actually pay money for paving the street your house is adjacent to (if you are a house owner, of course).

    Well that's retarded.



  • But:

    1. It's expensive, and it's really shitty to force thousands of little communities to install traffic slowing measures due to some asshole sociopaths in Silicon Valley. (Note that it's never Washington State companies making asshole applications like this one.)

    2. Those barriers also slow down things like, say, ambulances. Everything's a trade-off.



  • @JazzyJosh In the UK you have to pay a tax for owning a TV.



  • @blakeyrat Don't you only have to pay the tax if you want to get BBC?

    And I look around and apparently, no. Even if you are paying a third party for TV service, you still have to pay the fee to the BBC. That's retarded.



  • @blakeyrat

    Yeah, I know that's :bait: but I have a TV and don't pay for a TV licence. It's connected to the PS3 and just plays movies.
    That doesn't stop the assholes from sending me 'you'll be taken to court!' letters a few times a year though.



  • @Cursorkeys said in Waze Wars:

    That doesn't stop the assholes from sending me 'you'll be taken to court!' letters a few times a year though.

    You should send them a legal notice telling them to stop the harassment or you will sue them.


  • SockDev

    @JazzyJosh No. You only have to have a licence if you are receiving live broadcasts. If you watch Netflix or YouTube, you're not liable. You will be, soon, if you watch iPlayer on catch-up but that's it.


  • SockDev

    @TimeBandit or write to them revoking their right to access your doorstep. It's a legal thing and then they have no fucking authoritah whatsoever.



  • @JazzyJosh said in Waze Wars:

    @blakeyrat Don't you only have to pay the tax if you want to get BBC?

    And I look around and apparently, no. Even if you are paying a third party for TV service, you still have to pay the fee to the BBC. That's retarded.

    It's pretty complicated, in some cases you can watch TV shows without one: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/tv-licence

    @TimeBandit said in Waze Wars:

    @Cursorkeys said in Waze Wars:

    That doesn't stop the assholes from sending me 'you'll be taken to court!' letters a few times a year though.

    You should send them a legal notice telling them to stop the harassment or you will sue them.

    I probably should, the last letter looked like a court letter until you read it closely. I was pretty pissed about that. They've been properly told I don't need one for years.


  • Impossible Mission - B

    @blakeyrat said in Waze Wars:

    But:

    1. It's expensive, and it's really shitty to force thousands of little communities to install traffic slowing measures due to some asshole sociopaths in Silicon Valley. (Note that it's never Washington State companies making asshole applications like this one.)

    Yeah! What kind of horrible person would create something meant to help drivers avoid heavy traffic and get from point A to point B more safely and efficiently?!? That's simply unforgivable!



  • @masonwheeler It's not safer to have hundreds of dickholes driving through tiny quiet residential streets at 45 MPH.

    I don't know what Waze was designed to do, but if it was designed to make people safer, it's certainly a failure.


  • Impossible Mission - B

    @blakeyrat said in Waze Wars:

    @masonwheeler It's not safer to have hundreds of dickholes driving through tiny quiet residential streets at 45 MPH.

    I don't know what Waze was designed to do, but if it was designed to make people safer, it's certainly a failure.

    Headline News Effect strikes again.

    We tend to look at things with a basic presumption that they will work right. The phrase "works as expected," for example, shows a fundamental expectation that it will work. So if John Q. Person tries something and it works, from a psychological perspective, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about that to him.

    But if he tries it and it doesn't work, that's a violation of his expectations. That's worth noticing, and talking about. That's worth writing articles about. You never hear about all the millions of times something goes right; you hear about the few dozen times it goes wrong. This can lead to people who have no experience with the system gaining an impression that it's an utterly broken piece of crap when in actuality, it works really, really well in the vast majority of cases.



  • @blakeyrat said in Waze Wars:

    @masonwheeler It's not safer to have hundreds of dickholes driving through tiny quiet residential streets at 45 MPH.

    • Lower speed-limit to 15 MPH
    • Install photo-radar
    • Collect thousands of dollars in fine
    • use that money to improve the neighborhoods

    In the end, those retards will stop passing there (or will pay the fine price).



  • @TimeBandit But a city can't set up that whole process as quickly as Waze can select a new street. The article makes that point.



  • @blakeyrat the city's mobile donut processing units don't take short breaks to actually enforce the speed limit? How does the police department make its money, by property taxes?

    That's "mobile", as in, "can select a different street just as quickly as Waze can".



  • @anotherusername It takes weeks to lower a speed limit sign, and I'm guessing not much short to install a photo-radar system, assuming it's even legal in that town.



  • @blakeyrat you don't need to lower the speed limit. If people are doing 45 in a residential neighborhood it takes 15 minutes to send a cop to shoot radar and enforce the 25 MPH speed limit sign that's already there.



  • @anotherusername Well ok but that's different than what you typed like 10 minutes ago, so undefined


  • Impossible Mission - B

    @blakeyrat said in Waze Wars:

    @anotherusername Well ok but that's different than what you typed like 10 minutes ago, so undefined

    No, that's exactly what he typed like 10 minutes ago. It's very different from what @TimeBandit typed like 15 minutes ago, however. Try to keep up.



  • It seems like a solution to this impasse is still a waze away.


  • area_can

    @Groaner said in Waze Wars:

    It seems like a solution to this impasse is still a waze away.

    Living up to your name, I see



  • I'll never understand why these apps are so popular. For travelling, maybe, but it sounds like people are using these apps for their commute. Do you not know where you work? Or where you live? Can you not connect the dots? Using these apps to get home 5 minutes sooner is also a piss poor excuse for their existence. The only place you ever need to be in a rush to get to is a hospital.



  • @aapis said in Waze Wars:

    I'll never understand why these apps are so popular. For travelling, maybe, but it sounds like people are using these apps for their commute. Do you not know where you work? Or where you live? Can you not connect the dots? Using these apps to get home 5 minutes sooner is also a piss poor excuse for their existence. The only place you ever need to be in a rush to get to is a hospital.

    In the area in which I live, as soon as a drop of rain hits the pavement, or two people bump into each other on the Interstate during rush hour*, you are guaranteed an additional 30 minutes of commute time, minimum. If you are instead routed on local roads to avoid the congestion, you stand to save considerable time.

    *7-10:30am and 3-7:30pm



  • @aapis The article was about the DMV metro area. Based on the way the roads are laid out and commuting patterns in the area, everyone has multiple routes to get to work. Every day, at least one of those routes will be backed up by an accident. Knowing whether your preferred route is clear is a required skill.

    That doesn't justify unsafe driving through residential areas, though.



  • @aapis sometimes some fucking activists block some strategic part of my path.

    at least once waze got me home 3 hour sooner at home than my neighbor that did the usual path


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    @Groaner said in Waze Wars:

    as soon as a drop of rain hits the pavement

    Yeah. Idiots in my state don't know how to drive and have a weird phobia of rain. It's really weird.

    I mean, I could understand wrecks caused by the amazing sun being in the perfect angle to make viewing out of the windshield literally impossible without computer vision, but rain?

    Then again, I also did watch a sports car (that apparently didn't have anti-lock brakes) squeal as the driver slammed their brake pedal while going 60+ as the light turned yellow. The car ended up stopping in the middle of the intersection, and the driver hit it in reverse to get back before the crosswalk.



  • @NedFodder said in Waze Wars:

    @aapis The article was about the DMV metro area.

    The Department of Motor Vehicles?

    Based on the way the roads are laid out and commuting patterns in the area, everyone has multiple routes to get to work.

    Unless you're lucky and are close to your destination, commuting from the suburbs around DC is going to involve touching I-270, I-66, I-95, or the Beltway. All of these routes are parking lots under optimal conditions during rush hour (but some are worse than others). If your commute requires crossing the Potomac, there are no plausible alternate routes within ~50 miles. If there's an accident on any of these roads, you're not going to be reaching your destination anytime soon.

    Every day, at least one of those routes will be backed up by an accident. Knowing whether your preferred route is clear is a required skill.

    Yep, and each accident is going to add at minimum a half-hour of suffering to thousands of motorists.

    That doesn't justify unsafe driving through residential areas, though.

    I have been in favor of having toll lanes with a speed limit of around 120. The people who drive ticking-time-bomb clunker econoboxes won't be able to reach the adequate speed, so they'll stay off and break down on the main roads instead, letting the rest of us get home unobstructed.



  • @Groaner said in Waze Wars:

    commuting from the suburbs around DC is going to involve touching I-270, I-66, I-95, or the Beltway.

    There are always alternatives in that town. Instead of I66, I often took 50 or Braddock road. Instead of I95, I often took US1 or Backlick road (INB4 undefined ). (Luckily, I never had to cross the Potomac!) Not knowing your alternate routes is just asking for a 3-hour commute once a week.



  • @Groaner I don't understand the issue. Leave work 30 minutes later, or earlier.



  • @NedFodder Right, then there is even less need for a mapping app because you know the other routes. I don't know how these people manage to follow any of the rules of the road if they can't find their work, and their house, without a map.



  • @aapis The app tells you which routes have accidents, based on real-time data from other users of the app. If you don't think that's useful, I can't help you.


  • BINNED

    @aapis said in Waze Wars:

    it sounds like people are using these apps for their commute.

    I have never used Waze, but without GPS I may end up in Mexico.

    Do you not know where you work? Or where you live?

    Yes

    Can you not connect the dots?

    Apparently not, I have location-finding disorder (my wife tells me so)



  • @aapis said in Waze Wars:

    @Groaner I don't understand the issue. Leave work 30 minutes later, or earlier.

    why should he burn an extra half hour on the road when he can leave at his regular time and get to work at the regular time?


  • area_pol

    The core issue seems to be that the main roads do not have enough capacity for the number of people that want to travel.
    The fact that the traffic spills to nearby small roads is only a symptom of that - if the main road was passable, the mapping tool would select the main road.

    So instead of road blocks, build more public transport.
    If those applications are so great at transferring information between drivers to find the best paths, maybe a similar approach could improve efficiency of public transport?
    If there is a big statistical sample of which paths people take, the most needed public transport routes could be calculated.
    Or even more, people could place requests for the bus to stop at certain stop and if no requests were found, the bus could skip it for faster travel.



  • @Adynathos said in Waze Wars:

    Or even more, people could place requests for the bus to stop at certain stop and if no requests were found, the bus could skip it for faster travel.

    This is already a thing. Inside the bus there's a wire connected to a bell that you have to pull to ask the driver to stop at the next stop. If no one pulls the wire (and no one is waiting at the stop) the bus doesn't stop. Don't need no fancy apps or nuthin'.



  • @Adynathos said in Waze Wars:

    The core issue seems to be that the main roads do not have enough capacity for the number of people that want to travel.

    Yup!

    The fact that the traffic spills to nearby small roads is only a symptom of that - if the main road was passable, the mapping tool would select the main road.

    So instead of road blocks, build more public transport.

    Oh yeah, WMATA's equally fucked. Enjoy sitting in a tunnel for an hour because a rail cracked, or there was smoke, or an explosion....





  • @NedFodder said in Waze Wars:

    @aapis The app tells you which routes have accidents, based on real-time data from other users of the app. If you don't think that's useful, I can't help you.

    Oh goodie, more reasons for assholes to use their phones while driving.

    "I wonder if Waze shows an accident on this street?"

    SMASH

    There is now, you psychopathic retard.



  • Solution: seed false Waze reports to funnel traffic down an isolated street that no one else uses.

    Put a bunch of road tacks on the road.

    Watch the wrecks pile up. Loot the cars and bodies.



  • @Lorne-Kates said in Waze Wars:

    Oh goodie, more reasons for assholes to use their phones while driving.

    Yeah, the app crosses the line by showing which routes are congested AND THEN giving turn-by-turn directions for alternate routes. Not only are these assholes on their phones while driving, but now they're doing it in your neighborhood while you pray they don't hit any kids.



  • @NedFodder said in Waze Wars:

    @Lorne-Kates said in Waze Wars:

    Oh goodie, more reasons for assholes to use their phones while driving.

    Yeah, the app crosses the line by showing which routes are congested AND THEN giving turn-by-turn directions for alternate routes. Not only are these assholes on their phones while driving, but now they're doing it in your neighborhood while you pray they don't hit any kids.

    Yeah, I forgot about the "and blindly staring at their phone while they rocket to work" bit.

    My "road tacks" joke just went from joke to "joke" 😉


  • area_pol

    @NedFodder said in Waze Wars:

    Inside the bus there's a wire connected to a bell

    The wire is inside the bus, therefore not available on the bus stop.
    The general practice is that you wave at the bus for it to stop, but to see you the bus already needs to drive past the stop, so it can not choose a shorter path.
    With remote requests for stop you could try having a lot of small stops, with the assumption that many of them will be empty. Possibly with some dynamic clustering mechanism.

    Given requests like:
    "I am <here> along the bus line and want to use the bus, where is the nearest place I could board the bus?".
    The system would dynamically calculate most efficient stops along the route and send them both to the driver and the passengers.

    @Groaner said in Waze Wars:

    Enjoy sitting in a tunnel for an hour because a rail cracked, or there was smoke, or an explosion....

    Yes, every means of transport can fail. But when you want to travel somewhere, you have to choose one of them.
    Public tranport is more efficient then individual cars - so it could allow more people to travel using the existing roads.



  • @Lorne-Kates said in Waze Wars:

    Oh goodie, more reasons for assholes to use their phones while driving.

    The GPS on my phone only ever works when the screen is turned off, so I'm pretty much audio only for following waze.



  • @Adynathos said in Waze Wars:

    Public tranport is more efficient then individual cars

    Maybe for the system. Not generally for individuals.



  • @boomzilla I think uberHOP can be good. Does anyone here live somewhere where it's available?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.