SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the shortest-distance-between-two-points dept.
An L.A. Councilman is attempting to blame the application Waze for neighborhood "cut-throughs", where people divert to side streets during traffic congestion.
In his view this is a new phenomenon that has never happened before, although it is widespread around the world and has been so for many years, certainly existing long before 'apps' became popular. The councilor is planning on using a data sharing agreement with Waze in order to strong-arm the application into becoming less useful, which will not solve the problem because people will just use other applications, and those with local knowledge will still know the quickest route from A to B.
The popularity of Waze is largely because it helps drivers avoid delays and to find alternative routes based on the the reports received from other drivers. Applying the measures that the councilor is hoping for will neuter the app completely, rendering it pointless. However, the councilor does make one good point - there are more pedestrian safety facilities (e.g. crossing points, barriers etc) on major routes and that the practice might lead to increased casualty rates in residential areas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @04:08PM
I read that article and it does put up a reasonable argument. The argument is that we're compelled to pay for roads so why not fully utilize them when it better suits us since I'm paying for them anyways and my additional cost of using what I already paid for is small compared to my entire cost of building the roads. For instance if I can get a better job further away with higher pay and my transportation costs in addition to what I'm compelled to pay through taxes are $10 a month but I can make $30 a month more (just an example) my net benefit is $20 a month. However, what the government compelled me to pay for those roads is an additional $30 a month making my total cost for building the roads and using them an additional $40 a month. $40 - $30 = $10 that I'm out if you factor in what I pay for those roads as a taxpayer into the equation. If I get to choose not to pay for those roads if I don't use them and getting a slightly lower paying local job instead I would choose that because my net income would still be greater.
Perhaps this is a decent argument for toll roads but if we are to have toll roads the proceeds should be government collected to be distributed back into the general fund. If a business far away wants you bad enough ensure that they pay for your transportation as well, heck, they can even negotiate deals with government over bulk payment plans for larger quantities of employees.