
Does pressing the pedestrian crossing button actually do anything? - andyjohnson0
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23869955
======
AshleysBrain
I think there's a good reason to have buttons that do nothing: it improves
usability. Imagine teaching a child how to cross the road. The instructions
are:

1) press the button

2) wait for green man

3) cross

Now imagine we took away the buttons that do nothing. Now you need two cases,
or branching: look for button; if button is present, press it; otherwise just
wait - then cross. Obviously this is still trivial but raises the bar a little
and introduces greater possibility for confusion. Especially when talking
about children, this makes roads easier and safer to cross, which in turn
saves lives.

~~~
narcissus
That's definitely an interesting take, and it triggered a thought I had a long
time ago.

One thing I've noticed since moving to North America is that children get off
the school bus and will essentially just run across the street, including
straight in front of the bus, because they know the traffic around them has
stopped.

I can only imagine that that leads to some sort of subconscious thinking that
can only be dangerous once they are not on a school bus...

~~~
ethnt
It is. Two summers ago, a kid from my school got off a city bus, walked in
front of the bus and into the street and was hit by a car and killed.

------
mikelward
Often in Australia, pressing the button makes the pedestrian light go green.
But it has no effect on signal order (it goes green when cars traveling in the
same direction get a green light).

What's the point of making us press a button in this case? Why not give
pedestrians a green light automatically?

Even more obnoxious are intersections where the pedestrian light times out
from green to red, but cars still have a green light. You can press the
pedestrian crossing button and get a second walk cycle.

Again, why not just make the first walk sequence longer?

It seems traffic planners don't care about pedestrians.

~~~
e40
_It seems traffic planners don 't care about pedestrians._

You got that right. I walk 4+ miles/day on city streets and I've noticed a
steady erosion of rules designed to make pedestrian life safer and easier.
What you mentioned above and this:

In addition to lights which are timed to not give a "go" signal to pedestrians
unless they push the button, I've run across one that will make you wait until
the next cycle unless you press it before the current cycle begins. That is, I
push it a second after I would have gotten the "go" signal and I have to wait
an entire cycle before it actually tells me to walk. The effect of this? I go
anyway, but because the cycle without pedestrians is shorted this is quite
dangerous.

Here's another trending in my city: buildings which sit directly on streets
with parking lots that empty onto streets having their own lights, have
separate lights for pedestrians to regulate them _while on the sidewalk_. So,
you're walking down the sidewalk, no where near an intersection and a car
comes out of a "driveway" at 20+ miles/hour. Freaked me out the first time
this happened. I could have easily been killed as the car was just a few feet
from me.

My guess: some city planner was paid off to allow this completely unsafe
situation.

~~~
smacktoward
At least you have sidewalks!

It amazes me how many communities (here in the USA, at least) just completely
omit them altogether. They're so car-oriented that they actually _deny the
possibility of walking altogether._ You get the feeling that they'd ban shoes
if they could. Depressing.

------
dspillett
In York (UK) it is a mixed bag. There are a couple of simple pedestrian
crossings near my home where the lights never change without a press and
change very quickly once requested. At junctions it is more complex and seems
to vary: some definitely have their sequence altered by specific pedestrian
requests, some definitely seem not to. I've not noted if any vary by time of
day, as some people report.

~~~
stickydink
Well this is a rare treat, a fellow York dweller, greetings!

~~~
regularfry
What? 3 of us? Heavens!

~~~
c1c2c3
4 actually!

~~~
dspillett
We might need a few more than that before practical world domination plans can
be conceived...

------
thom
There's some next-level traffic light voodoo I often see people attempting in
the UK, which is repeatedly pressing the button. I like the idea that it's a
democratic process: only when pedestrians outnumber cars will the lights
change.

~~~
andyjohnson0
I've seen people do this with the Clear button on calculators. They press it
repeatedly, presumably in the belief that extra presses make it "really
cancel". Something to do with their mental model of the calculator's internal
state?

~~~
JonnieCache
I used to do this. It's because of the confusing presence of the AC button.
The UI has made clear to you that there are multiple levels of cancellation,
one can in fact "really cancel." We know full well that there is some
overcomplex internal state to the device, and rather than reading the _manual_
for a _calculator_ (honestly) we hammer the cancel button a few times, just to
make sure.

~~~
andyjohnson0
I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense.

A quick search reveals that some calculators have an AC button (clear
everything) and a C button (clear last entry), while others have C (clear
everything) and CE (clear last entry). Definitely confusing.

~~~
JonnieCache
I'd forgotten about CE. Even worse.

------
tvwonline
I pay way too much attention to these things. I have found on my walk to work,
some buttons which do nothing, some which you must press and some you must
press if it is after 10pm.

At least where I live, it depends on the intersection. So don't assume
anything.

------
raverbashing
"The short answer is - it depends. At a standalone pedestrian crossing,
unconnected to a junction, the button will turn a traffic light red

At a junction it is more complicated."

That's all you need to know.

I've been to places where the 1st case applies. Press the button, the car
signal turns yellow immediately (light traffic and light pedestrian traffic)

At a crossing, let's see, you got there and you pressed the button, then
another person came and pressed the button to cross the other street (meaning,
traffic where you want to cross)

No system can make sense of these requests, and the traffic has to flow. Makes
sense to just go through the movements and ignore the buttons.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
> _No system can make sense of these requests, and the traffic has to flow.
> Makes sense to just go through the movements and ignore the buttons._ //

One _may_ not be able to mathematically ensure optimal operation but you can
certainly "make sense" of the requests.

Surely you read the inputs and only include the pedestrian crossings in the
lighting sequence if the buttons are activated. Unless you're halting the
traffic for some ulterior flow management need.

As for non-interrupt raising buttons - the "WAIT" light should show to
indicate the button isn't required to be pressed.

Lastly, some crossings in the UK have what appear to be cameras (I assumed
some form of wide angle IR sensor) facing the pedestrians. I assumed these
could provide input as to density of pedestrians waiting in order to balance
flow of pedestrians vs. road traffic. Anyone know certainly what they're for?

~~~
raverbashing
"and only include the pedestrian crossings in the lighting sequence if the
buttons are activated"

That works for a pedestrian crossing, but not where we have two lanes of cars
crossing.

Or if you think in more complicated crossings like O'Connell Bridge in Dublin,
there's probably no way the buttons could have any input in the lights there
without messing the traffic.

Not sure what the cameras you mentioned do, maybe it's the usual "Big Brother"
cameras

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Some crossings here, UK, have turn filters; some have full pedestrian access
(ie diagonal crossing of a crossroads is enabled). Whilst it's possible to
have a sequence in which some roads necessarily have halted traffic usually on
single carriageway roads [one lane per direction] it's still an optimisation
to ignore the pedestrian phase of the sequence.

------
INTPenis
Yes actually, here in Sweden you have a lot of buttons with a light under it.
I just love seeing people who don't understand these crosswalks, when the
light is on, that's when your timer is actually counting. When the light is
off, there is no timer counting down to let you cross.

So some people get to the light, and wait, thinking it's one of the many
automatic crosswalks. But it's not! The light must be pushed! So they just
stand there forever until they finally think "screw law, I'm crossing".

That is funny to me. :)

------
kozhevnikov
The linked "secret button" article discussion is at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5792039](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5792039)

~~~
NoWhiteHorse
A piece of (old) satire on the pedestrian button hacks:
[http://www.bbspot.com/news/2005/06/crosswalk_button_hacks.ht...](http://www.bbspot.com/news/2005/06/crosswalk_button_hacks.html)

------
Jacqued
The most fascinating part of this for me is that people _actually_ pay
attention to the green and red men at crossings, and even to crossings at all.
I mean, sure, where I live children or older people who can't walk very fast
wait for the green man but most regular folks just go and cross where and when
they please.

I believe in Paris all of these are entirely automatic ; though there are
buttons that are here to help the visually impaired by telling them where they
are and if they can cross safely.

~~~
paulbennett
This is fine on quiet roads, but doesn't work in busy cities. If you tried to
cross the road on my walk to and from work without waiting for the traffic to
be stopped you'd get hit very quickly!

edit: perhaps you live in Paris? In which case I don't envy you having to
cross the roads there!

~~~
thaumasiotes
> This is fine on quiet roads, but doesn't work in busy cities.

I guess I can claim to have lived in Shanghai for a span of (not many) years,
and I have to dispute this. People will just walk out into the middle of a
busy street, making lane-by-lane progress much like Frogger if they have to.
They do it because the only real alternative is not crossing the street at
all. When I was working at an international school here, it was common (and,
in my view, completely justified) for new arrivals to want help crossing the
street. But the fatality rate is quite low. ;)

------
johnchristopher
In my hometown they replaced old buttons that emitted a sound and a visual cue
(green light silhouette on the device) with touch-sensitive devices that
doesn't blink, sound or anything. For months we kept on 'pushing' on it and
then once or twice I saw some of them being lit for a few days and now they
still seem to be 'dead'. Something's wrong with the interface and the local
authorities badly managing urban infrastructure.

------
harimau
Over the past few years in my neighborhood in Los Angeles they have been
replacing the older yellow buttons (that people tend to hit 10 million times
thinking it will make the light change faster) with newer ones, which are
really great. When the button is pressed, makes a loud click, a red light
comes on, and it stays depressed until the signal changes. They've also added
in that rat-a-tat-tat clicking that I assume is for blind people. Some people
still pounce the button but I've noticed most tap it a single time. I'm a big
fan and I'm sure the city is too as it probably cuts down on wear and tear.

In terms of actual crossing, it is worth hitting the button at some lights, so
that they know there are pedestrians (otherwise it could be a green light and
you still have a red hand) and other times there's always a way for a
pedestrian to cross, usually with a countdown timer after a certain amount of
seconds. Every ped crossing in LA seems to have a countdown timer, which is
great, for peds and even drivers (it gives you an idea when the light is about
to change).

And remember, this is Los Angeles, not really a city known for pedestrians so
I think the city has done a good job for the most part.

------
philhippus
Pretty sure it alerts the system that there are pedestrians waiting to cross,
otherwise why stop traffic if no-one is there?

~~~
tapworthtg
So, do you think the quotes from people running the system who say that is not
the case are lying for some reason? Or do you think you know more about how
their system works than they do?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
The question still stands. Why interrupt the road traffic if there are no
pedestrians waiting? It's possible to answer that "for flow control" but I'd
warrant that's not an effective proposition for the majority of junctions.

I didn't see this specific question addressed in the OP so it's quite possible
it was simply glossed over to provide a simplified answer or the reporter
worked around it to make it easier to express the sequence.

------
darklajid
For me the most interesting piece in that article was the image of a crossing
where pedestrians can actually walk _across_ the crossing (like, diagonally)
instead of just a single street.

Haven't seen those anywhere here and I assume those are actually kind of nasty
for car traffic (since .. all directions need to stop). Fascinating :)

~~~
samscully
They are called scrambles, there are a few in the UK but they are much more
common in Japan. As you surmised they only really make sense when there are a
large number of pedestrians and vehicular traffic has a low priority.

When I took traffic engineering at university we were taught that crossing
layouts like this where pedestrians can move more freely are statistically
much safer as drivers drive much more carefully. Another example is Exhibition
Road, where the entire road is shared between pedestrians and cars.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhibition_Road](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhibition_Road)

------
eksith
I'm fairly convinced, with the exception of a handful, pretty much all the
crossing buttons in Brooklyn NY are placebos.

I've seen people roundhouse kick the thing (not an exaggeration) and it makes
sense to have one that doesn't work since if it did previously, this treatment
would kill it in no time.

Also, newer ones are popping up that aren't spring based, but are touch
sensitive instead. Basically a shiny Aluminum or Zinc knob that beeps to let
you know it's pushed. I think these are more effective since with the old
ones, you're not even sure if the push got received.

It makes sense to have buttons that work in places where people actually
expect functionality and such is desired. Not in a place where the default is
impatience followed by vandalism.

~~~
kalleboo
> Also, newer ones are popping up that aren't spring based, but are touch
> sensitive instead

This is the standard type in Sweden.
[http://imgb.mp/jie.jpg](http://imgb.mp/jie.jpg) The whole front plate is
touch-sensitive, it beeps and the light on the bottom lights up after it's
been pressed until you can cross the street. I've never seen one not working,
so they must be pretty vandalism-proof.

------
zem
in the usa, i've definitely seen lights where a larger road crossed a smaller
one, and the small road green light stayed green longer if someone had pressed
the pedestrian crossing button. which does seem like a sensible use of the
button - from a flow-control point of view you want the large road green a lot
more of the time than you want the small one green, but if someone is walking
across they're going to be potentially a lot slower than the traffic (people
with walkers, e.g.)

------
CmonDev
Not nearly as annoying as lift/elevator buttons.

~~~
andyjohnson0
There is a persistent myth that some elevators (aka 'lifts' in my part fo the
world) have an express mode that can take you to a chosen floor by pressing
the door close button in conjunction with the appropriate floor button [1]. As
far as I know its false. I try to avoid using elevators, but the ones I do use
always seem to have a key slot to allow them to be put into 'privileged' mode.

[1]
[http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/17/051017ta_talk_pa...](http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/17/051017ta_talk_paumgarten)

~~~
upthedale
See my other reply for the perils of an express mode, which the lifts in my
building do have (of a sort), and everyone knows about.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6326890](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6326890)

------
coldcode
If a traffic light is dumb (and most are) and the government wants to optimize
traffic flow, then a button that disrupts the timing will mess up the traffic
flow. An intelligent light controller might be able to include the random
changes and still optimize the flow. Sadly very few light controllers are
smart enough to do this.

------
Fuxy
I like the UK system and the way its implemented.I doesn't have to respond to
a button push all the time plus you can always cross if you believe it's safe
to do so.

Makes a lot more sense them forcing people to stand at a red light uselessly.

------
kriro
There's also sound for the blind integrated with the buttons in Germany.
Removing a placebo button would also mean removing that extra sound. You could
probably separate the two functions though.

------
mcv
In Amsterdam, it activates the clicking sound for blind people. Very
convenient if you're blind, I presume (I've never been blind for long enough
to give it a try).

