this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2025
354 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

63614 readers
3038 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5292633

This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/science by /u/calliope_kekule on 2025-03-01 05:53:17+00:00.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wait until it learns that lanes can be turned into dedicated tram corridors.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Wait until they run the numbers on carbon emissions of stop signs vs. sensible yielding laws.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Yup. Most European countries barely use stop signs as opposed to the US.

[–] [email protected] 72 points 2 days ago (3 children)

"big data" is not generative AI. They're different things. Just in case anyone read that as "AI fixes things".

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago

It's weird cause technically adaptive traffic patterns are trained using tools like reinforcement learning, which is technically AI, however it's the broad term AI and not GenAI.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (7 children)

I mean, this is also an area where neural networks will improve things. Neural networks are excellent for optimizing data with an extremely large amount of input variables, as is the case here. You don't need language models, you don't need to steal all the content on the internet for training. You have analysis tools that will easily validate any solution, so you're not going to deal with mystery hallucinations.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

It's a confusing situation, because big data is what it sounds like. Large amounts of data on actual events. But it doesn't mean they didn't use AI to help interpret the data, or to come up with the adaptive traffic signaling.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Why does it often seem like only China is using modern tech to make real quality of life improvements? It's the opposite of the US. Seems like that same modern tech is making everything a bit worse day after day.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

More and more countries are using mass surveillance to control the population so China might not be the only ones using it to deal with traffic at all.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They have more catch-up to do. The US already does things like traffic control, but they have a different goal: they want drivers to feel like they're making progress instead of actually improving things.

For example, we put traffic signals everywhere instead of teaching people to use traffic circles. Why? Drivers like to drive fast and would rather stop than slow down. Traffic circles improve flow, but they do reduce average speed, whereas traffic lights decrease flow and increase average speed. It's stupid, but we're entitled jerks who like to show off at signals.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

but they have a different goal: they want drivers to feel like they're making progress instead of actually improving things.

Sorry but I want a source for that claim.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

That was a bit tongue in cheek, but my point is that we're ignoring an obvious solution due to inertia. Here's a short video by John Stossel interviewing the mayor of Carmel, Indiana, which converted to roundabouts, and here's a longer CNBC video about them as well. That second video is interesting because it shows that roundabouts started here in the US, but fell out of favor when salespeople pitched signals as cities electrified.

Here's a video that's a bit more critical, and the main argument against roundabouts is they're expensive and disruptive to put in. That's true, but it doesn't explain why new signal-based intersections are put in.

Politicians will take the lowest fiction solution to keep their positions. Switching to roundabouts is a large political risk, even if it's backed by science. People hate change, and roundabouts are annoying to get used to.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Take a look at the USA government right now. 😜

But ya you're right, anyone could have been doing this for a long time. I guess it's just politics.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You wanna reduce traffic times with these better lights? Think of all the billions of dollars lost to advertisers since people won't be forced to look at their ads now while waiting!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

It's infuriating when a light turns red while only a few of the cars have gone though, makes sense a more intelligent algorithm would be more efficient.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

I think it's often the opposite, a traffic circle is much less intelligent but quite effective at increasing traffic flow. We can't put them everywhere, but we should put them in more places.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I pass like 15 lights on my commute and the amount of time standing still for NO REASON is absolutely infuriating. How much could it possibly cost to add a simple sensor? No cars coming from the sides? Light stays green! But no, it's all just dumb timers instead...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Interestingly, some lights are set up to deliberately slow down speeders. If you are above the speed limit, they turn red, just to slow things back down. Unfortunately, most of the people involved never put cause and effect together.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

What annoys me is the road to work in the morning actually seems to do the opposite. It’s a 35 or 40mph road, but if you do 40 you’re not gonna make it through without stopping. But if you do 50-60? No stops.

Once again though people don’t pick up on this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

how would that even work, if there's no indication that driving too fast was the reason for the red light?

do these actually include some sort of screen that tells the driver they were too fast and that's why the light turned red?

I'd imagine that this "feature" would only result in more frustration, and thus more speeding, instead of less.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (9 children)

They will truly do anything not to admit the problem is cars

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 days ago (5 children)

No they aren't. They're saying smarter traffic systems are an improvement over what we have now. I've looked in the article and nowhere do they say cars aren't a problem, or that emissions is down to traffic lights not cars.

I see so many examples on here and on Reddit of people letting perfect be the enemy of good.

Whether we like it or not, cars will be around for a while. It makes no sense to put zero effort into improving efficiency in the meantime. You don't have to be so all-or-nothing.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes, and such intelligent systems can also optimize for pedestrian traffic, reducing the time waiting for a walk light, monitor bike lane usage, track dangerous intersections, improve emergency response times, prioritize buses and trams, etc. It's good for people to be gathering this data and trying to make things better.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Yes, and such intelligent systems can also optimize for pedestrian traffic,

In the US, these types of "intelligent" systems almost always degrade pedestrian traffic quite severely.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Exactly all this does is create more road capacity which will inevitably lead to more cars and then increased congestion.

This is the big data equivalent of “one more lane”.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

In Switzerland we have sensors in the streets at most crossings. And behind it I assume, is a determinate algorithm whoch decides who has green for how long. This mainly is done to avoid the backing up of one crossing into another.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Maybe they could just try a roundabout? Or even better... Ditching the dead end of car dependency for free public transport?

Because phony "AI" is here to save capital, not the planet.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

The article mentions specific deterministic algorithms so I don’t think it’s AI in the way youre thinking.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›