You ever see a dog that’s got its leash tangled the long way round a table leg, and it just cannot grasp what the problem is or how to fix it? It can see all the components laid out in front of it, but it’s never going to make the connection.

Obviously some dog breeds are smarter than others, ditto individual dogs - but you get the concept.

Is there an equivalent for humans? What ridiculously simple concept would have aliens facetentacling as they see us stumble around and utterly fail to reason about it?

  • bluGill@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Traffic is a numbers game. I’ve often observed that in free flowing traffic where I live (a tiny city with only about 700k people in the entire metro) that if you take two cars that are a safe following distance apart there will be 5 cars in between. If we put in 6 times as many lanes (already a 3-4 lane freeway each way, so we are talk 20 lanes for my tiny city!) traffic wouldn’t go any faster, but they would space out to most maintaining a safe following distance. (if you put in 7 times as many lanes they would get farther apart yet, but still not go faster)

      • bluGill@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That research is useless! Sure they measured it, so it isn’t wrong. However it is useless. What it is really saying is your city was so bad that people were not taking advantage of living in the city because they couldn’t conveniently get places. Those people could have lived in rural Montana for all the good a city did. Cities are about all the things you can do by living in it, so if people change because of new roads then you are a city were not meeting their ideals.

        Also note that they measured one lane. I already asserted that by the time a city is thinking about adding one more lane they already need to add 6 times as many lanes (not 6 more lanes, 6 times!) IF your city needs 6 times more lanes than it has, no wonder people are choosing alternates, and once a lane exists they will start using it.

        Again, the moral is build transit in cities.

    • NewNewAccount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I’m understanding correctly, your example wouldn’t apply to a highway that is experiencing heavy congestion.

      • bluGill@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It would, but worse. Both are a case of more cars than there is space. Heavy congestion would just need a lot more lanes to fix - maybe 10x as many. (don’t ask me to pay for that or where those lanes go)

        Or in short, support better transit for your city. For that cost of miles of 15 lane highways you can put in a lot of transit.

          • bluGill@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, PRIVATE transit. I don’t support the government building roads - that is meddling in the natural state of things and makes private industry unable to compete. If you must have socialist roads than you must have socialist transit as well, but I reject that.