MIT Algorithm Predicts Red Light Runners 348
adeelarshad82 writes "Researchers at MIT have developed an algorithm that determines which drivers will run a red light, within one to two seconds before a potential collision. The research, based on 15,000 cars at a busy intersection, monitored various factors to determine which cars were were likely to run a red light. They found that their predictions were correct about 85 percent of the time, which is about 15-20 percent better than existing traffic prediction algorithms."
Welcome to the Future Crime unit (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Hell of a turnaround. Detection to verdict in 1.5 seconds!
Article summary (Score:5, Funny)
Deep.
Re:Article summary (Score:5, Funny)
I notice that, despite being an MIT team, they analyzed data from an intersection somewhere in Virginia. Probably because their model from a Boston intersection was even simpler:
Re: (Score:2)
So if the car is at the stop line and its speed is over, say, 10 mph I'd say it will be running that red light.
Um..., the ones not slowing down? (Score:2)
Wirelessly (Score:2)
"For the technology to work, How said vehicles would need to be able to communicate with one another, wirelessly sending and receiving data like the car's speed and position."
This would require the red light runner to also be transmitting their speed and position.
Re:Wirelessly (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, if everyone is being told to not enter the intersection because someone might run the red light, then you can more safely run red lights.
That's got to count for something....
Re:Wirelessly (Score:5, Funny)
Old joke:
I was recently riding with a friend of mine.
We were coming to a red light, and he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" He tells me this is how his brother drives.
We come to another red light, and again, he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" Again, he tells me this is how his brother drives.
We come to a green light, and he slams on the brakes. My heart nearly goes into my throat. I shouted at him, "Why do you do that?!"
He replied, "You never know, my brother could be coming the other way."
Re: (Score:2)
I assume it merely selects... (Score:5, Funny)
I assume it simply selects BMWs?
Especially in China! (Score:2)
Great comment, did you read the NYTimes article about stereotypes of various car drivers? I think it went something like this:
BMW - Arrogant, spoiled (this perception went way up after the official's son who killed someone while driving a BMW)
Mercedes - for older people
Audi - powerful (don't mess with the driver. This is because many officials drive this)
American cars I seem to remember have a pretty good reputation. Who knew? ;). But I guess they've been getting better.
Fuller version of story and video (Score:3)
Red Light Runner Prediction (Score:3)
I usually look when the light turns green to make sure no one is about to run it. I have a similar accuracy in determining when I shouldn't cross because someone is going a little too fast. I don't think it's the speed, because some people like locking up their brakes at the last second. I think even those people have their foot on the break and are ready to stop. Whereas runners won't be decelerating much or if at all, and may not even be looking at the red light. Just imagine you're driving on a straight flat piece of land through a green light. That's what those drivers will do. That kind of behavior. Only the light is red. If you watch for it, you'll see it every time.
My issue with this technology is that the dumber types will pick it up and think that the same idea can also be used to catch speeders, drunk drivers, etc, etc. So they'll demand those systems be built and offer stupid amounts of money for it to happen. When it does happen, and it just might, the accuracy will be low, but you'll still have to go to court to fight your way out of a DUI because the computer said you swerved more than a few inches once. They already managed to get the field sobriety test approved, which most people fail SOBER, especially beside a busy interstate in the cold at night with all those bright lights buzzing past at 70mph. You fail a field sobriety test, you're drunk. Period.
Re: (Score:2)
Most, if not all, places give you the right to refuse the field test in favor of a blood test.
More inconvenient, yes... but I think I like the accuracy of the blood test far more than that of the aforementioned "sobriety" test.
What's the point? (Score:2)
I bet a human has even better accuracy at forecasting this. I don't think anyone needs an assistance from a computer to tell them what they are already seeing.
Re: (Score:2)
Well if a computer can predict this it could I don't know hold the yellow longer so they do not run a red light and potentially cause an accident. Fining people has little to no value it's using a stick to try and illicit better behavior. The point is to reduce accidents not make money for the government.
Re: (Score:2)
I say take that a step further. If the light communicates with a vehicle that it thinks is going to run the light, don't increase the yellow time since that could encourage additional cars to enter the intersection; instead increase the pause between the light turning red in the current direction and the light turning green on the opposite approach.
Re: (Score:2)
While it's impossible to run a red light when both lights are green/yellow, it won't reduce the number of accidents.
Tuppence Predictor (Score:5, Funny)
Is driver on mobile phone? Add 1
Is driver drinking coffee? Add 1
Is driver putting on makeup/shaving/combing hair? Add 1
Is driver having animated (you can see heads turning and arms waving about) discussion with passenger/children? Add 1
Is driver speeding? Add 1
If your score is 3 or higher then expect them to run the light, hope you are not in a crossing lane.
Re:Tuppence Predictor (Score:4, Funny)
Is driver is engaging in intercourse? Add 2
Is driver playing Angry Birds? Add 2
Does driver own any Apple products? Revoke license
Bad metric (Or, I have a better solution) (Score:5, Insightful)
Predict that every car will not run the light. My prediction is correct much more than 85% of the time. Why aren't I in the news?
Re: (Score:2)
They wanted to put you on, but they didn't have any way to contact you.
Perfect fit for a Self-Driving Car (Score:2)
Come to think of it, the whole interaction would be a no-brainer. Car detects red-light runner, car avoids red-light runner.
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, you've got it all wrong! It's a driverless car! It should pull out IN FRONT OF the red-light runner! Then it would remove the jerk from the driver pool without injuring any innocents! It's perfect!
Now what ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does the red get held on the cross street longer ?
That just makes the red-runners life a lot more safer and encourages the behavior.
Does it trigger the 5ton metal barrier at the stop line ?
That make sit safer for the cross street and discourages the behavior. But we don't have the 5ton barriers.
Re: (Score:3)
Hehe, oh [youtube.com] yes [youtube.com] we [youtube.com] do [youtube.com]...
Though, they do take too long to actually deploy. Work on that... and I think we have an answer...
Re: (Score:2)
Off the top of my head, assuming the junction is being monitored then the person running the light is going to get a ticket anyway (if they run the light after the computer has predicted so).
The side benefit of the prediction is that the system might hold the other light longer to prevent injuries to those people actually following the law. That the lawbreaker is also safer is just a side effect - they still get a ticket, but maybe they don't take out a minivan full of old people while doing it.
MIT? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually.... a FOAF got a job as a cop here (yes Boston area). On her first day out driving she was approaching a light behind another car. It turned yellow and she stepped on the gas... completely forgetting that she was in a police cruiser, a fact which was apparently not missed by the person in front of her who dutifully stepped on his breaks and came to a stop at the light..... whoops.
How soon before cops start using this? (Score:3)
Using this technique plus normal(?) traffic cameras, police could pretty quickly build up a list of habitual red light runners. (Even if they didnt actually "run" the light, they would be put under suspicion). They could be put on a list for "random" pull overs. (This presumes that video cameras with auto license plate reading are present and functioning on police car dashboards. I'm not sure this is the case nationally, but when I was in Denver recently a police car pulled over my friend because the computer had her license plate on a list. Call it the "Do Not Drive List").
This is nothing compared to when face recognition systems become widely prevalent. That'll blow away the "big-brother" predictions made by science fiction films like minority report (which used retina scans). Of course, WE'VE been supplying the government with tons and tons of this pre-edited, organized data tagged data. Thanks Facebook! (which is another reason why I don't use it). Call it the "Do Not Walk List".
That coupled with national biometrics programs (India, Afghanistan) and GPS tracking in every smartphone (Carrier IQ) and warrantless tapping/tracking of American citizens (war on terror) means we are rapidly heading towards a world where your government CAN know where you are at every moment. Whether or not they WILL know where you are is up to the battles over privacy information.
Where's the Work? (Score:2)
(snap m.i.t.)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more than that, what the heck does the "85 percent" rate mean? I would think that MIT's press release could at least bother to indicate sensitivity and specificity as separate numbers. If they falsely predict that 15% of people (one out of roughly six) who stop are about to run the light, that poses major problems for any field use of the system.
Re:Where's the Work? (Score:5, Interesting)
...As for the 15% error, did anyone consider cargo?...
THANK YOU!!! As an economic refugee of the "Great Recession", I ended up driving a tractor-trailer for a living - and wound up learning a few things along the way. One interesting fact I've learned is that a fully loaded (80,000 lbs) semi moving at 55 mph can take up to 300 ft to come to a complete stop (think about that next time you want to "brake-check" a truck...). I have, unfortunately, run across traffic lights in which the yellow phase was, for some strange reason, really short- even if the the semi is traveling the legal speed limit. This is not a situation you want to be in: your choices often boil down to:
(1) Stand on the brake in order to not run the impending red light (remember that 300-foot stopping distance? By the time you get stopped, your trailer in squarely in the middle of the intersection. And that's if you don't jackknife and end up wiping out 5 or 6 cars along the way).
(2) Run the light (Yes, it's going to be red by the time you hit it, meaning you will almost certainly incur the wrath of any red-light camera or nearby cop - but see option 1 for the alternative scenario)
This is probably the number two reason I try to avoid surface streets when possible (reason number one being the preponderance of infrastructure not exactly designed with a 75-ft long, nearly 14-ft high vehicle in mind). I figure any traffic engineer worth his salt is going to take these factors into consideration; a failure to do so is going to inevitably invite the occurance of an 18-wheeled clusterfuck and all that comes with it (major property damage, potential loss of life, etc).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The reason that trunk front brakes in the USA have been historically weak is that the drivers disable them to save money on brake and tire wear. The new rules will simply require them to discontinue this dangerous practice.
Re:Where's the Work? (Score:4, Informative)
The paper is here [mit.edu], and it gives ROC curves. They used two approaches, a hidden Markov model and a support vector machine Bayesian filter.
Red light delay. (Score:5, Insightful)
Years ago I was sitting at light. The light turns green and the driver in front of me starts going oblivious to the car that's sailing down the road and clearly not intending on stopping for the red. So this guy slams right into the guy in front of me.
This was back when a light would turn green almost immediately after the intersecting street's light would go red. Drivers in my city are notorious for flaunting the rules and generally driving like jerks, but it was rare to have someone go through a red because people were aware of the risk involved.
Then at some point in the past 10-15 years traffic engineers got the idea to delay the interval between one light turning red and the next going green. So now there's a good 2+ second delay where all lights are red.
What has been the side-effect of this change? Now people brazenly blow through red lights. And the thing is that I've seen it happen everywhere, upscale and low-income areas alike. I've seen lines of 3-5 cars keep on going through when the light had clearly gone red. It's so bad sometimes that there are still cars in the intersection after the other light has already turned green, and this is with the aforementioned delay.
But yeah, it's pretty easy to spot the ones who aren't going to stop. They're the ones still moving at a good clip and making no attempt to slow down and stop.
This is why I'm somewhat supportive of stop light cameras. It's not like speed cameras which don't really target the real problem, aggressive or careless driving. Going through a red light poses real danger and is a clear example of reckless driving. Of course, I realize that stop light cameras are abused as well; one popular tactic being to shorten the yellow in order to boost the number of offenders. Otherwise running red lights is a persistent problem I don't really see anyone addressing. Probably because it involves more effort and brings in less revenue than going after speeders.
solving the wrong problem (Score:2)
This seems like a half baked solution to one aspect of a bad idea. At least it's not as bad a "solution" as installing red light enforcement cameras everywhere. Intersections are just plain bad. Yellows are often too short for a variety of reasons, and that is the number one cause of red light running. After improving the signal timing, which shouldn't be hard, roundabouts may be the most practical alternative.
Then there's the interchange, which is unfortunately very expensive. Yet it's crazy the way
Can they install this at the DMV (Score:2)
to filter out the bad drivers before they go for their test. Have a stop light before the door and see who runs the yellow light.
Hmm, Christiansburg, VA... (Score:2)
I'm wondering what an MIT team was doing studying traffic at the home of Virginia Tech? Were the two cooperating, or was there some sort of one-ups-man-ship going on?
Not Much of a Problem Here (Score:3)
I assume their plan is that 2 seconds is plenty of time to avert an accident by hitting the guy who was going to run the red light with some sort of rocket? This is MIT we're talking about, so I'm going to assume some sort of rocket is involved somehow.
Idiotic police (Score:5, Funny)
A friend was pulled over by police for running through an intersection just as it turned from amber to red instead of stopping. She said that because the car behind was tailgating (business as usual), to have stopped would have caused an accident, so in her judgement it was safer to continue. That cut no ice and she was booked. Eventually they let her go and then pulled out behind her and followed. At the next intersection, the lights were on amber so this time she stopped. The police patrol car ploughed straight into her rear. They booked her again (she was naturally livid) but elected to take the matter to court. She was cleared of all charges including the original offence and the police had to pay all costs. Justice.
Sometimes the right thing to do is to press on on amber - I usually stop but only if there's time to do it without the half-asleep moron behind rearranging the back of your car.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not like you can deploy a SWAT team in front of the driver in time to stop him from running the light and never know if he would actually have done it.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:4, Insightful)
Have a mechanism that can quickly raise a physical barrier (nice thick steel plate or something) in front of where you're supposed to stop at the red. The barrier lowers when it's green.
Or have a hole that would stop a car just like a ditch, that gets bridged when the light turns green. Now yellow means "prepare to stop" not "punch the gas and hope you don't hit somebody". Problem solved. With that covered, you can then design the lights and the timings between lights to minimize stopping both for travel efficiency and fuel economy.
I also wish they'd put concrete posts every so often wherever there is a double-yellow line. So you bought an SUV and refuse to learn how to handle a vehicle that size? Okay. You get to pay for repairs when you cross the median and strike the concrete posts. Fucking tired of putting my tires in grass because some idiot who hopped on the "must have an SUV" bandwagon decided that being halfway in my lane on a blind curve was his best move. You want to eliminate this kind of idiocy, make it more painful and make the consequences more confined to the person who is the idiot. You think that's harsh? Ever been hit by one of these morons? Getting hit by an SUV is pretty harsh too. Seems proportional to me.
Oh and if you want to fix tailgating, put a spike or a spear on the back of each vehicle pointed downwards from the roof towards the driver's side, right at the height where the windshield of the vehicle behind would be. Suddenly everyone will be more courteous and use a good following distance. Not because they really have any respect for the law or the safety of other drivers, but because being impaled is likely to be a slow lingering death and they will fear it.
If there are going to be so many childish, impatient, stupid people and for some reason we're giving them licenses, might as well recognize what you're dealing with. They don't care that their stupidity might kill someone. They don't care about the measly little fine they might get since for some reason failure to yield (you know that thing that actually causes accidents) is a minor violation like speeding (which doesn't). They don't care that having a cellphone in one hand and a cheeseburger in the other to satiate their fatass appetite is dangerous. So let's quit coddling them since it doesn't work and move on to something they do care about. They do care when there is a certain, immediate, severe consequence. That gets the attention of even the most selfish bastards.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
> Have a mechanism that can quickly raise a physical barrier (nice thick steel plate or something) in front of where you're supposed to stop at the red. The barrier lowers when it's green.
From what I've seen where I llive, you don't need anything anywhere near that drastic. People here will slow down to 2 mph and carefully and gingerly make their way over three-inch speed bumps.
So, have *five*-inch mechanical speed bumps at the stop lines, synchronized with the lights. The drivers' brains will explode as they struggle to decide which animal urge to follow, to display their status by blasting through the light, or protect their property by stopping.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Funny)
How about a ramp that pops up, so the red light runner will just end up flying over the intersection, Dukes of Hazzard style? Even better if the intersection had a PA system to play Dixie when it happens.
It might not be pretty when they land, that's their problem for running the light...
Re: (Score:3)
Posts like yours are why I still come to Slashdot. HAH.
Of course, coming from Tennessee, I see a potential issue with rednecks intentionally hitting these at high speed while a buddy gets video.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Funny)
two and three are all you need.
You can claim you thought you saw a cat/dog/child/buffalo/griffin/whatever.
My solution to tailgating when I was on my way home from a paintball match was to toss a handful of balls out the sunroof.
-nB
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Why do you feel they have a higher-priority right to go faster than I do to go the speed I'm going? If they don't like the speed I'm driving, they can pass me. It's not like I'm driving under the speed limit - I'm generally a few MPH above it. Also you apparently think tailgating only happens on freeways, since "getting out of the way" isn't practical on a two lane road.
My solution to tailgating is to slow down. As soon as they back off - or as soon as they're not behind me (passing or whatever) - I immediately return to normal speed. But, frankly, if they're going to drive in a way that increases the chances of an accident involving me, I'm going to make sure any accident happens at a lower speed.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:4, Insightful)
The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Why do you feel they have a higher-priority right to go faster than I do to go the speed I'm going? If they don't like the speed I'm driving, they can pass me. It's not like I'm driving under the speed limit - I'm generally a few MPH above it. Also you apparently think tailgating only happens on freeways, since "getting out of the way" isn't practical on a two lane road.
My solution to tailgating is to slow down. As soon as they back off - or as soon as they're not behind me (passing or whatever) - I immediately return to normal speed. But, frankly, if they're going to drive in a way that increases the chances of an accident involving me, I'm going to make sure any accident happens at a lower speed.
As a motorcyclist, I take this same approach. Fuck you tailgaters, I don't want to die, because you want to following me so close. If you're going to decrease your reaction time to me stopping, then I'm going to reduce the chance that I'm going to have to stop. And don't flip me the bird when you drive by... it's my fucking LIFE on the line... worst you have to deal with is the insurance totalling your car...
Re: (Score:2)
Well, presumably you'd just wait a little longer until turning the cross traffic light green. Maybe it'll help get a clearer shot of the red-light runner, you know, for insurance purposes.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Congradulations, you just invented the "delayed green". You should patent it, before the guy who has been setting intersections around here up like that for years does. We have them all over the place. Also.... I really wish that articles like this would get beyond things like "see we can do it". I would love to see what it is that predicts these actions, and see if it says anything about whats going on.
Cuz in the end, its not about catching people who run lights. Enforcing the law is not an end in and of itself, its supposed to be a means to an end. Who cares if we can "catch" more people? It may feel good and let someone justify their job with some metrics but, it doesn't solve the original problem of risks and dangers....not in anything even approaching a realistic way.
Like the delayed green... I would think that a very slight delay would cause any such accidents to drop off. In fact, as I said, we have lights timed like this all over the place, and while I have seen a few accidents, the only "red light running" one I know of involved a drunk guy blowing through a light that was just plain red, not even green and turning.... I don't think anything is going to solve that one, there will always be a few true idiots.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:4, Informative)
Who cares if we can "catch" more people?
The people who add the fines to their revenue.
As far as I'm aware, the only thing that's been proven to reduce the number of accidents at stop lights is to make the orange phase longer. This is why cities that want to increase revenue have often been found to have made the orange phase shorter.
Re: (Score:2)
There will always be people who will push the limits. When the US speed limit was 55mph, people drove 65. Speed limits have been raised to 60 in some places, people drive 70 there. Where the limit is 65, people drive 75.
If you make the yellow longer, people will get used to it and run yellow lights that they would have stopped for before. If you make the yellow last 60 seconds, you'll have a lot of people waiting 50 seconds longer than safety requires and some people will still run through it after 59.
Re: (Score:2)
If you make the yellow longer, people will get used to it and run yellow lights that they would have stopped for before.
The idiots will. But sane people do stop when the light goes orange, so giving them more time to stop means they're less likely to end up going through the red because they can't stop in time.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, you are making an error of assumption in assuming that people who run lights generally do it willfully by thought, and not negligently by distraction, or though misjudgment.
Actually, thats one of the few things that I remember from taking the one social psych course that I took.... they called it the "fundamental error of assumption". That is, that people tend to ascribe internal motivations to other people's actions, and external ones to our own. So, you ran the red light because you are impatient and try to cut it as close as you can. I ran the red light because the yellow was excessively short, and you were sitting in the passenger seat talking to me and distracting me.
Sounds ridiculous when you say it like that but, its actually pretty common.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Informative)
"they called it the "fundamental error of assumption""...
I think you mean the fundamental attribution error [wikipedia.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
the orange should be timed such that if you are in the solid paint lines at the intersection queue (where the left turn lane often starts) at the speed limit then you should be able to not slow or speed and make the intersection, while if you are outside that zone you will also have a reasonable distance to stop within.
-nB
Re: (Score:3)
You are clearly not a driver.
The reason tickets aren't given out at 1km over the limit is because various factors (tyre pressure, weight of occupants, etc) can affect the accuracy of the speedometer. Also, in the US at least, speedometers can legally register high (tell you you're going 45 when you're only doing 40) but never low (tell you you're doing 35 when in fact you're going 40). This means a cop matching your speed can assume you are actually going less than the displayed speed, but not more. Thus, t
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, while sane, thoughtful people would come to this conclusion, someone, somewhere would rather make a profit off of it. This isn't theoretical, it's already happened, as some cities would rather profit at the expense and injury of motorists. What this does to insurance and medical rates I hate to think.
This sort of thing would be great for "dynamic yellow lights," as you implied. A sane, rational person would use this to make a yellow light last a little longer to prevent an accident. People like the above could widen the range a little and make it shorten the yellow light to catch a few extra bucks. It's not the technology; this algorithm is cool and great. It's the few abusers.
Body Language (Score:3)
I would love to see what it is that predicts these actions, and see if it says anything about whats going on.
I was hoping for the same info. I am left to figure that it is the obvious items, like approaching the intersection above the speed limit, accelerating at the yellow, perhaps a recent lane change.
Interesting to me is when I am in traffic and I think "That guy wants to cut me off" or "This guy wants to get the jump on me when the light turns green". Sometimes I can point to a behavior and say 'there
Re: (Score:2)
I like Germany's system:
Red == stop.
Red + yellow == wake up and stop texting, light will change.
Green == proceed
Flashing green == be prepared for the yellow.
Yellow == stop now.
We don't need more red light cameras and crap like that. Instead, we need longer yellow lights (the good drivers WILL stop for the yellows, so it won't just make people floor it more often), and more intersections with a delay. Yes, some people will push the limit, but that is what police officers are for with citation notebooks.
You
Re: (Score:3)
It's not like you can deploy a SWAT team in front of the driver in time to stop him from running the light and never know if he would actually have done it.
Can delay the green on the crossing street, or even put up an alarm with flashing blinkers so no one enters the intersection. The flashers can be implemented with the existing traffic lights, so not that expensive. What is expensive is setting up the cameras linked to a central computer on every intersection. They kind of doing it already with the red light cameras though.
Re: (Score:3)
I think deploying a bollard in the path of the potential light runner will get the message across.... CRUNCH!
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:4, Informative)
For anyone confused; a bollard is a retractable concrete or metal post that comes out the ground to block traffic. They seem to be popular in Europe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIqlkPhDfwM [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZdLjKl0lHc [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Good call, yea. I think most people over here wouldn't know the term either.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:4, Interesting)
Nah. That'd cause a car to stop dead in the middle of the intersection and make a bloody mess of traffic.
Instead, you want a smart deployment of spikes which puncture only a single tire. More than enough to seriously piss off a guy running the light, while still letting him limp out of the way to the shoulder.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, yea. It would be messy and annoying the first few times it happened... but I strongly suspect it would stop happening...
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, but reality necessitates that you'd have to deploy them everywhere before the psychological effect widely sunk in yielded results.
It's hard enough to teach your local population on which day to take out their trash during a holiday week. It's damn near impossible to train out-of-staters and tourists that they can or can't turn on red.
And we haven't even gotten to the matter of this being pretty obvious case of 'cruel and unusual punishment'. Hell, the danger to bystanders and the traffic created
Re: (Score:3)
Delaying the light because somebody's likely to run it has it's own problems. Every day around here I'd be surprised if there weren't hundreds or even thousands of cases where people ran red lights and nobody was hurt or killed.
I do personally support efforts to keep people from running red lights, it is important to keep things in perspective. Is further gridlock across the city and an incentive to run red lights more or less harmful than the status quo? Personally, I suspect that it isn't, at least around
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
The easiest way to reduce red light running is to make yellows longer.
It's more effective than a red light camera, but not nearly as profitable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
In the UK, the green light blinks before it turns yellow. I've always wondered why we don't do that here.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like you can deploy a SWAT team in front of the driver in time to stop him from running the light and never know if he would actually have done it.
Can delay the green on the crossing street, or even put up an alarm with flashing blinkers so no one enters the intersection. The flashers can be implemented with the existing traffic lights, so not that expensive. What is expensive is setting up the cameras linked to a central computer on every intersection. They kind of doing it already with the red light cameras though.
I propose we have walls, big thick concrete suckers, which pop-up when lights change. That'll sort it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But they could slow down the transition to green for the other side to prevent collisions.
Re: (Score:2)
Otherwise more people might start running the red light because they know the green would be delayed...
Re: (Score:3)
This is actually an interesting question.
In some ideal fantasy world focused purely on safety and low of traffic, the ideal action would be that when the system detects detects someone is about to run a light, it keeps the light yellow for longer and/or delays turning the cross traffic light from red to green.. Allowing the driver to pass safely and keeping cross traffic stopped.
Of course it could just be used punitively to gain more money :P
And of course if people ever got wind that this was implemented,
Natural consequence (Score:3)
Delay the cross-green briefly to prevent a collision... and tell the next stoplight that the red light runner is going toward that it should give that car a red light well before he gets there. You run a red light here, and you're likely to be fourth in line waiting for the red at the next light. It is easier to do that where lights are mostly sensor-driven than where strict grid timing needs to be followed.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Sure, let's stop any applied sociological and psychological research whatsoever because OMG 1984 STALIN HITLER!!!
Not all slopes are slippery.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, so that's why my June ski trip to Whistler ended badly.
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Funny)
Haven't you ever heard of the Slippery Slope Conspiracy? It involves a bunch of government agents who scream "Slippery Slope" at the most absurd things so that people will be desensitized to Slippery Slope claims because they will think that the people who make those claims are a bunch of nut-bars! And in another month's time the Slippery Slope Conspirators will have achieved a perfectly zero coefficient of social friction and make the rest of us their true slaves! Not only will we be digging canals with spoons and carrying spoons full of dirt 20 miles up hill both ways and with a 50 lb. steel ball tied to our ankle, but we will be happy for it!
Note to conspiracy-conspiracy theorists: I'm not being serious. Just to be clear, this conspiracy is a figment of my sarcastic imagination and not real.
Re: (Score:2)
Note to conspiracy-conspiracy theorists: I'm not being serious. Just to be clear, this conspiracy is a figment of my sarcastic imagination and not real.
Yeah, that's what they always say. Bet you're laughing your ass off about all the gullible sheeple who believe you, while you proceed to execute your plan for world domination.
Slick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I believe that "pre-crime" was the creation of Philip K. Dick. [philipkdick.com]
As for the essence of human predation, who is more dangerous? The one that pillages, or the one that allows toxic waste to enter the community food chain, or the one that does not return the favor of helping the community when the community helped that person, or the one that would create laws that prevent o
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, that's stupid. It's literally seconds before the crime is committed. Wait 6 seconds and you can ticket them for actually breaking the law. The applicable field for this information is self driving cars. If a car can know when a red light running is going to occur, it can not drive out in front of it.
It's amazing how paranoid you can be.
Re: (Score:2)
With this, its just a matter of time before these "predicted" red light runners are ticketed for their "pre-crime".... We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Pre-crime is Philip K Dick as interpreted by Steven Spielberg
Orwell warned about a totalitarian state directing every action and every thought
We are already living in the brave new world Huxley predicted. I'd say we rocketed past Huxley twenty years ago, we are currently Orwellian, and we're one lab-experiment-gone-wrong away from "I Am Legend" (Richard Matheson)
Re:Just a matter of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY DETECTED.
The only slippery slope fallacy is the claim that when you give government new powers they won't abuse them and extend them to the ultimate limit. Occasionally that's true, but usually only because the powers become obsolete due to technological change, or because voters prevent them from doing so.
And I'm rather amused to see someone with 'Hail Eris' in their sig ranting about EVIL LIBERTARIANS.
Re: (Score:3)
Uh huh, and which world would that be?
Re: (Score:2)
We largely solved that by implementing a tailgating law. Basically if you run into somebody's tailgate you're responsible unless you can prove that it's their fault. It does have issues from time to time like when somebody swerves in front of you and slams on the brakes, but ultimately most of those problems aren't there if you keep adequate space ahead of you.
Re: (Score:2)
It does have issues from time to time like when somebody swerves in front of you and slams on the brakes, but ultimately most of those problems aren't there if you keep adequate space ahead of you.
In Britain there's been a spate of people swerving in front of other cars and slamming on the brakes so they can make a big insurance claim, thanks to the belief that the person who hit them must have been driving too close.
Laws largely affect the sensible, law-abiding people who'd mostly act sensibly anyway. The idiots don't care because... they're idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars in MA routinely run a red lights because they are afraid of being tailended it they stop. Seriously.
This is why MIT did the study in Virginia.
Re: (Score:2)
It's good that they know fear. Not many inanimate objects are capable of that emotion. Although many can smell it.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I've seen, the worst red light runners go through after it's already turned green for the other direction
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure governments everywhere will scramble to implement this revenue-reducing technology.
Re: (Score:2)
I, for one, welcome our 360-degrees-at-once-seeing overlords.
I mean, yes, I keep my eyes open and pay attention to what's happening, too. I very rarely get surprised in traffic. But it does happen. I just can't look ahead of me and to both sides, at cars in multiple lanes, bicycles, and pedestrians, in the presence of obstacles on the corners, figure out there is a threat, and at the same time check my mirrors to know if I can step on the brakes or should get out of my lane to avoid being rear-ended.
Yes, th
Re:Why just predict, when you can prevent? (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a pretty big assumption. The advantage this thing has is that you can outfit the traffic lights to delay the green light while the runner crosses and prevent the problem without instrumenting every car on the road.
And ticket the jackass who might have killed someone.