At least in Ontario, Canada you have as much time as you need to make forward progress once you legally enter the intersection. Or something like that. But the light is there to indicate it is allowed to enter, not how long you have.
I'm not saying I'm a golden egg among rotten ones here in my country, Colombia, but I have 20 or so (conscious) years of my life 1) not running to reach my destination and 2) being relaxed most of the time without the need of drugs or anything. It seems so normal for me not being rushed, waiting for the lights when I'm driving or walking, crossing the street using designated intersections.
In any case, I've measured things as simple as how long it takes for me to reach bus station from work place, and I've sometimes reached it sooner than some people I see running. I know it sounds crazy, but some times they forget to buy the ticket, or they get blocked by slow people taking ALL the road (three horizontally-aligned people in a four tops road), while I keep my pace.
I'd wish people had less worries in their life (we all have our problems and demons), and could keep their peace of mind without worrying about everything or having OCD or something.
Reminds me of a story by Derek Sivers [0] on the marginal time savings of biking at an all-out sprint pace vs. a more moderate (and more enjoyable) pace. A sprint gave him only a 4% time boost, whereas, as he puts it, "I could just take it easy, and get 96% of the results."
The Quebec that's in Canada? I'm Canadian but not from Quebec.
The last time I was there (in Montreal) at every corner I had to wait for three or four cars running the red light and even then sprint across the street since I lost valuable crosswalk seconds.
I think you're a Quebec driver trying to lull me into a sense of trust so you can run me over when I visit.
Same in Germany. The problem is that many car drivers don't know this. I have been honked at and showered with profanities more than once. And I am not a slow walker.
My experience in Germany was, as a ped, that people re rigid about crosswalks (only during green and within the marked crosswalk), else you risk getting looked askance. I learned to obey the crosswalk signals (rather than take them more as suggested indicators as in the US).
It's weird that so many people report that. I'm a German who never waits for the green light at crosswalks and I never get any funny looks or comments.
Even within the US crosswalk behavior varies. Living in Boston, I cross wherever it's clear. In Seattle and its suburbs I've seen people get tickets for crossing a completely empty street.
Most drivers (as a generalization) have distain for pedestrians and expect them to get out of their way all the time because they are in an automobile, thus much more important. I've been cursed at and honked at many, many times for entering an intersection at the very beginning of the "walk" symbol because the driver wished to make a right hand turn. More than once! There's actually some intersections where it's actually very dangerous to cross at the "walk" symbol for that reason.
Then there's the drivers who believe they are more important than even other cars, they believe stop signs (and red lights to an extent) don't apply to them and just ignore them and go when they feel like it and expect other people to stop for them. I was hit by a car as a child pedestrian by a driver who didn't even slow down for a red light. Luckily they didn't do any damage as they slammed on the brakes last minute and only knocked me down. Just the other day I had a near miss, as a driver, with another car who ran a red light. That driver flipped me off because I was in their way and they believe themselves to be much more important than me. Last time I drove with my dad he yelled at me for not illegally cutting off the driver who had the right of way but was a little slow entering the intersection. My dad is a huge asshole in practically every other way possible.
It's gotten so much more hostile in the last decade. This is why self driving cars can't come soon enough.
Same in the uk - green doesn't mean go, it means go if it's clear. Pedestrians can take all week to cross if they want. Drivers will honk their horns for sure but legally the peds have right of way.
Same where I am in the US. If they are in the crosswalk they still have right of way.
In my area they have special blinking lights near crosswalks by heavy traffic areas. You press a button to walk and it comes on instantly, speed limit is only 35 mph. There is also a special pedestrian only red light button for major road crossings. No cars use the light and it only turns on for people walking.
Same in Germany. In Hamburg, the Critical Mass bikers make use of this trick: They are cycling as one large group, and thus are treated like a single vehicle (a special rule, intended for groups of bike racers): once the first biker is on the crossing, everyone behind them can follow, even if the lights go red. in the summer, several thousand bikers participate!
And when I was in Prague (I think) they had on all crossings pedestrian green light for like 5-10 seconds top, specifically to use this rule about starting crossing on green. I assume the idea was to make pedestrians cross in groups, not in continuous flow.
So one thing traffic lights do is stop people dying. (Unless Freakonomics want to tell me otherwise)
But they cost money and apps cost money, so how much are the dead people worth?
You then could just rely on the legalities I guess and ignore the article which was mostly about safety.
Dead people cost a bit, but the elderly a lot less, sometimes you save money. Often we get these figures wrong because of emotions and it's hard to exactly quantify.
I was curious how long it's been around, and did some digging. It seems to have been launched in 2009[1] and greatly expanded between 2011 and 2013[2].
How many elderly people actually have smart phones? The article said they had very few users, but blamed it on unwary users. Of the 70+ year old people that I know, most do not even have a dumb phone, let alone a smart phone.
I look at innovative services/apps that target the elderly as something that may not be as relevant to the current elderly generation, but in 10-20 years when more tech-savvy people have aged there will be a huge need for services like this. Elderly people in even 10 years from now will own smart phones.
I totally agree. It's about fixing problems ahead of time. The only problem is that without a drive now, the tech could disappear, and when it finally does become relevant, an argument might be made that "it didn't work before, so it's not going to work now".
> in 10-20 years when more tech-savvy people have aged there will be a huge need for services like this
The need is for people to be mobile and to not get run over, not for them to have something that can use their gadget for.
And what does tech-savyness have to do with it? I forgot more about tech than the average person learns, and that is why I don't have a smartphone. Not because I'm so scared of it, but because I like to get shit done, and I know how to configure and operate an actual computer to do so. So speaking of the future, will people be allowed to not be chipped in some way, or will we continue to invent straw men for the choice not to be, as if opting out is the problem rather than needing everybody to opt in?
Here's an idea: if you have a smart phone, walk to the middle island, press the button again, and play tic tac toe or whatever fancy stuff it can do. The person who is forced to just watch cars for 2 minutes instead, let's get a solution for them first. It will also work for the smartphone owner so they're not really second, it's just that you don't waste time coming up with a non-solution first. That's what'd happen if we didn't use the disabled and elderly to put a nice face on our emerging dystopia, but I know that's way too radical.
Just today I saw the saddest thing in the subway. Two toddlers in a big carriage next to me, when I saw them I had to grin at first, as they were moving around and making sounds, spreading a spirit of liveliness as toddlers tend to do. But then daddy handed them two big tablets (the one for the girl was pink, I shit you not), and they started both watch a cartoon and fell silent, the girl with her back turned to her brother. They couldn't even talk yet it seemed, since they had just made noises before. The father seemed super fond and attentive of them, it would have been easier to stomach if he had seemed loveless... but he wanted to make the train ride more enjoyable to them, that's all. This is the best way he knew how. I died a little inside taking all that in in the span of a few minutes, and I doubt I will fully recover. I had to look away at some point because I felt like crying. Never mind turning me off from the always on blinkenlights hanging jaw lifestyle, never mind my own doubts about having kids just for Moloch to eat them as they bounce around like hollow pinballs, this was fit to turn me off public transportation. And I've seen, and smelled, some horrid stuff, I saw some very depressed or sick people. But nothing stung like this.
Maybe the button should just scan for nearby bluetooth activity and if there is none it just assumes the person operating the button is old and gives them more time.
From an UK perspective, their crossing are way to wide. If you have a shorter crossing, the crossing is less of a factor, (also shorter total cycle times).
The problem, is that you holding up all the other traffic for one pedestrians. Get the crossing length correct, have the elderly person cross at the start of the green then the time is sufficient.
Also changing the timing as one junction intermittently makes the coordination between set of traffic signals harder and can be big disbelief.
Notwithstanding, the wide junctions allow more space for cyclists.
There is a stop at the median (which would require median) for 4+ lanes. U have to push the button again in the middle.
Also have some that activate the whole crosswalk, but u can stop at middle of u think u don't have enough time, can push button for the remainder of trip
What I hate more than slow people, fast people and people on bicycles.
I cringe each time someone decides to run across when everyone is already focused on the people already walking at normal pace to exit the crosswalk.
Super dangerous.
I have clipped a guy on a bicycle(just bumped rear tire, hardly any damage and cyclist was fine), and almost hit 2 kids and adult ( all different instances)
Countdown helps. Traffic Signals in London, an amber numerical countdown display, indicating to pedestrians the time remaining to cross the road. This discourages pedestrians and cyclists to start to cross.
Unfortunately, it also encourages drivers to gun it when there's only a few seconds left on the countdown ("I still have seconds to get through the intersection!") - which increases the number of cars running red lights.
The countdown is only shown when the pedestrian crossing is on green. Drivers don't get a countdown on their green signal. Most also have a plastic shield around the countdown so you can't see it from where the driver is sitting to avoid people preempting the signal change.
Zebra or horrible in terms of accident statistics. (Roughly an extra 2-3 serious per year more than traffic lights) Multiple Zebras crossing/Junctions can not be co-ordinated for either pedestrians or traffic. There are only a very few situations were Zebras are better.
Also drivers can get very aggressive with a slow moving pedestrian at a Zebra.
It's not quite the same thing but I can verify that certain Scandinavian countries really expect you to "get a move on" when crossing the street. There isn't enough time to walk across crosswalks in Denmark, for example, if you don't have some spring in your step.
Is that not OK? In the UK I get the impression you can trundle along at any speed and assume the people in the cars have the decency not to mow you down until their lane is free even if the green man is red now.
Jay-Walking though is crazy as a law. I prefer NOT to use traffic lights where traffic allows.
> 19. No pedestrian shall remain on the carriageway within the limits of a crossing longer than is necessary for that pedestrian to pass over the crossing with reasonable despatch.
That covers standalone pedestrians crossing, junctions is TSRGD. But same principal pedestrians must reasonably cross, but Green -> Only Go if the way ahead is clear..
In Sweden, at some point they removed the "blinking" phase near the end of the crosswalk green light without making the green phase any longer. This is to avoid people see it go blinking and then running across the crosswalk. This means it feels like you don't have enough time to walk across before it goes red (even though the cars still have to wait)
Slightly of topic: A while a go I visited South Korea for the first time, and got weird looks whenever I pushed the button at crosswalks, that and the button talked back...Next day I'm again at a crossing with our Korean client and push the button, she starts laughing and tells me: I had no idea your were blind :) Turns out the button only calls out when it's safe to cross.
I can't speak to this design specifically, but in the US, an app like this should _request_ a time slot for crossing, which would get processed by the timing controller.
An attacker could use long range bluetooth antennas to pair at a distance, and request for the next 3 intersections, the high tech equivalent of pushing all the buttons in the elevator.
> Another version detects visually impaired pedestrians and activates the ticking sounds that tell them whether the light is red or green.
As a visually impaired person I think the ticking sound should be on all the time at traffic lights. When I visited Madrid and Barcelona recently that was the way they handled it.
I think this is a social problem, not a technological one. If there's an elderly person taking longer to cross, stop and wait, or help them out. I haven't read of any significant road-rage caused by elderly taking too long to cross traffic signals.
We've been doing this since cars became mainstream, not really sure why we need to add an app and sync the traffic system with this app.
A six-land dual carriageway means that there's definite possibilities that drivers won't see him, and are traveling at a speed where a sudden stop is actively dangerous.
We solved this with crosswalks. Now all we're doing is adding dynamic timing based on pedestrian movement.
Interestingly, I often have the opposite problem here. The walk light turns on and I'm done crossing the street a good 45+ seconds before it actually lets traffic go. It would be nice if it somehow knew no one else was waiting to cross and let traffic go.
Of (not that I would ever do this) someone sees an opportunity and jay-walks but the walk light still turns on because they also pressed the button.
Re: Jay-walks then crossing. Some crossing and junctions skip the pedestrian stage when there is no one waiting even if the button was previously pressed. They have crossed in a gap, demand/button cancelled by detector.
The problem is curtailing the "Walk light" is that no detector is 100% reliable, so (say) if a visually impaired pedestrian is crossing and not detected, it raises as big safety concern.
I wonder how they're gonna deal with abuse. What's stopping an idiot from flooding every single light with requests and making them slower than default, disrupting the entire traffic?
Why couldn't it be a physical button on the traffic light itself instead of an app? Seems easier to use and would limit abuse to a single location at a time.
<quote>Most potential users are elderly and often wary of relying on unfamiliar technology. “We had to approach them one-on-one and show them how the app worked on their phones. Once we did that they were keen to get involved, but the barrier was very high. We held a presentation and put an advert in a local newspaper with a circulation of 2,000 and 10 people came forward.”</quote>
10 people responding to an ad seen by 2000 is actually a decent success rate. Print ads aren't very good for anything other than keeping the company in the front of the reader's mind. They're great for companies like big chains ("Next time you want fast food, come check out the new BigMac for just $x.xx"), but not for people trying to elicit specific actions immediately ("Download this app now for increased walk times")
couldn't we simply have crosswalks that have 3 buttons for short (bike) medium (normal walking) long (need extra time)? Seems like it would be cheaper and more accessible than an app.
This is wonderful. Light timing where I live is appalling and while I'm a fast walker it must be terrifying for elderly/disabled people. Quite a lot of American city infrastructure is really hostile to pedestrians.
Even better would be to just fix the light timing, and make the roads safer for all pedestrians, not just those using this app. This is a blatant band-aid on a more significant problem.
Fixing the light timing is harder than it sounds. Too long for pedestrians (When there is no demand and lots of wasted time), encourages drivers to not fully comply with the signals. At least with this app, it minimised the extended crossing time to only when needed. The drivers can then see the mobility impaired pedestrian crossing and confidence remains with the timing.
A startup in Scotland lets disabled users press the cross button by tapping an app on their phone. Conceivably the app could tell from movement whether the person was crossed before communicating it's safe to let cars go again.
