How expensive would it be anyway to completly tear up the road and put in place something that probably wouldn't help anyone much?
Issue i have with it is that pedestrians will cross thinking that this magical red light on the road is going to stop anyform of traffic, what if a bus driver going 30mph (50kmh) has to stop with a bus full of standing passengers because someone looking at their phone with their earbuds in can't hear or care to notice any traffic. Although as Six Six Seven Seven said, it would work well with autonomous cars (but there does have to be a threshold, like you can't have a car stopping with 90% brake use just for one pedestrian.
How does it work any differently than a normal crosswalk? You have to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks anyway. It's literally exactly the same, but with a light to show that there's someone crossing. And red light of not, if you walk directly out in front of a car you're going to get hit.
Seeing that the current system would work just as well as the smart system why should we spend more money on that? Also what if they get hacked and the pedestrian just walks over it and the self driving car doesnt notice it until they get relativly close and boom pedestrian gets hit at 30kph wich still could be lethal and would have been avoidable if theyd use a normal system where you have to still look before crossing it. Also when we all have electric cars and theres a overnight power cut so you cant charge your car how can you then go to work?
would probably alert you through a phone app or something, car designers have thought of this (i assume?)
By learning how to make your own petrol and driving an older, better car. --- Post updated --- Out of curiosity, what'd alert you through a phone app? Because cars and phones should mix as little as possible
an app, so overnight or whatever when the car is charging then the phone will alert you (or show a persistent notification of the car's charging stats)
Ill probably buy alot of old cars and make them run on ethanol or something so i dont have to drive them
Well forgive me for only wanting to use an 'emergancy stop' in an emergancy. As apposed to whenever someone feels like crossing the road while being completly and entirely oblivious to everything around them
How about you think about anything presented in that video, existing road law and safe traveling speed
So I've watched the video (only the top one. So far atleast), and from what they're visually showing me, it mainly seems to benefit people who are staring at their phone, with their peripheral vision being the floor. Which brings me to my previous, effective and cheaper solution. Stop staring at your phone and look where you're going. As for the kid dropping the ball into the road, it doesn't matter the crossing is there or not. Any driver actually paying attention will know to stop without the fancy lighting. If people stopped using their phone while driving, concentration shouldn't be a problem. Those capable of looking at their phone are capable of looking at their surroundings
Then you're still blindly missing the point. It's a normal crossing. Nothing changed but it lighting up now. It doesn't give a free pass for people to cross at all. In most countries pedestrians have right of way and you speeding across without giving way makes you the asshole
I'm not saying I don't give way. As you say, it's a normal crossing. So what's the point of spending hundreds of thousands on them, when they do the same as what we've already got? if that isn't the definition of a waste of money, then I don't know what is. You can clearly see the ones we've got now, whether it's light or dark. Where's the benefit? It just seems like another case of doing something because you can. Regardless of whether it actually benefits anyone.
The crossing seems like a cool idea in theory, but in practice it's expensive and doesn't have that much of a benefit as far as I can tell. They aren't paying attention regardless, a crossing that lights up might catch their attention for a while but then they'll get used to it and continue hitting people because they can't keep their eyes off their phone. The real issue is people too busy on their phones, pedestrians or drivers, stuff like this is just a band-aid solution.
The point is that there have always been and will always be people who aren't paying attention. Telling people to be careful or go slow is simply not effective in reality. If everyone had common sense, we wouldn't need any laws at all. The mentality behind new ideas like this is to recognise that people will never follow laws, and to design infrastructure to make it as difficult as possible for people to hurt themselves and others. Maybe the smart crossing works, maybe it doesn't, but that doesn't mean it's not worth trying.
I cross a highway everyday to go to classes. The speed limit is 40 MPH, and there hasn't been any issue with people being hit, despite this being a college campus full of young adults with more balls than brains. Does the UK really have that big of an issue with people getting hit at crosswalks? Also, if I understand correctly, the 'smart' crossings don't do anything besides give a visual cue, which won't help inattentive drivers. It sounds like someone trying to get publicity, not someone trying to actually make crosswalks safer.
This crossing thing reminds me of the 11ft 8in bridge channel on youtube. Gets trucks hitting it all the time. Then they come along and add a laser measurement system along with a giant sign that lights up and 4 red lights around it. Surely that would put an end to it for anyone who isn't literally sleeping at the wheel. Lo and behold it still gets hit all the time, even with a huge sign. Dumb people will out dumb any "smart" crossing.
