Incidentally, in Seattle, most residential streets don't have stop
signs.
"Crash data show there are far more accidents at intersections in
Seattle with stop signs than without. ... Which brings us to traffic
circles, an approach that reduces collisions by 97 percent." from
https://www.kuow.org/stories/stop-signs-arent-all-theyre-cracked-be-seattle
Peri
<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
------ Original Message ------
From: "Bill Dube via EV" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: "Bill Dube" <[email protected]>
Sent: 01-Feb-22 15:48:05
Subject: [EVDL] OT: US traffic controls (was: tesla's sneaky rolling
stops)
Tesla should treat a stop sign according to the law. However, the computer
is acting logically according to the actual situation. I would suspect that
there logically should be a yield sign instead of the stop sign.
In most civilized parts of the world, stop signs are _extremely_ scarce. In the
US, they are the default at most intersections. I can only recall seeing half a
dozen stop signs in all of Auckland. No doubt there are more, but they are used
sparely because they are needed extremely rarely.
I suspect this is to generate revenue in the form of traffic tickets in the
US. Only in the US do the ticket revenues go directly to the police
departments. In most civilized countries, they go to the national coffers,
which removes (most) of the obvious conflict of interest.
Obviously, someone has to yield the right of way to someone else at an intersection. In
sensible countries, they use "yield" signs. Only in the few intersections that
have visibility difficulties, or some unusual hazard do they place the very rare stop
sign. They often don't have any signs at all, where you apply whoever standard yield
law/procedure. It all works wonderfully with few traffic accidents. Traffic flows much
more smoothly and efficiently with yield signs instead of stop signs.
When folks in the US do a rolling stop (often called a Hollywood stop,)
they are doing the logical thing. They have slowed sufficiency to ensure that
they can proceed without violating the right-of-way.
<soap box mode off>
Bill D.
On 2/2/2022 11:39 AM, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:
Ok, my opinion. I think one should look at the intent of the law requiring a
full stop at a stop sign. From what I learned, that is to allow getting a full
view of the intersection before proceeding. If you don't come to a full stop,
you might not notice a pedestrian starting to cross. Or, if the cross traffic
doesn't stop, you might miss an oncoming vehicle.
So, for human drivers, a full stop makes sense.
In the future, good sensors and self-driving software should be able to
determine if a full stop is necessary. The software can look in all directions
at once and doesn't need nearly as much time as a human to make a decision. If
the view of cross traffic is blocked, it will need to be ready to stop, but may
not need to completely stop once at the intersection. I can imagine that full
stops and, perhaps, even stop signs themselves will eventually become relics.
In the mean time, I think Tesla's should obey the law. Once Musk can prove his
vehicles don't have to fully stop, maybe he can lobby to get laws changed.
Peri
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [email protected]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [email protected]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
