Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Communications Transportation Google Network Networking Social Networks The Internet News Technology

Weary Homeowners Wage War On Waze 767 writes: For many drivers, the app Waze is a godsend, providing real-time, crowdsourced traffic tips to motorists desperate for alternatives to congested thoroughfares but to some residents of the formerly quiet neighborhoods through which Waze has rerouted countless commuters, the app has destroyed their quality of life. Steve Hendrix writes at the Washington Post that when traffic on Timothy Connor's quiet Maryland street in Tamoka Park, MD suddenly jumped by several hundred cars an hour, he knew that Waze was to blame for routing cars around a months-long road repair through his neighborhood. "I could see them looking down at their phones," says Connor. "We had traffic jams, people were honking. It was pretty harrowing." So Connor became a Waze Warrior. Every rush hour, he went on the Google-owned social-media app and posted false reports of a wreck, speed trap or other blockage on his street, hoping to deflect some of the flow. Neighbors filed false reports of blockages, sometimes with multiple users reporting the same issue to boost their credibility. "It used to be that only locals knew all the cut-through routes, but Google Maps and Waze are letting everyone know," says Bates Mattison. "In some extreme cases, we have to address it to preserve the sanctity of a residential neighborhood." But Waze was way ahead of them. It's not possible to fool the system for long, according to Waze officials. For one thing, the system knows if you're not actually in motion. More importantly, it constantly self-corrects, based on data from other drivers. "The nature of crowdsourcing is that if you put in a fake accident, the next 10 people are going to report that it's not there," says Julie Mossler, Waze's head of communications. The company will suspend users they suspect of "tampering with the map."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Weary Homeowners Wage War On Waze

Comments Filter:
  • by borcharc ( 56372 ) * on Monday June 06, 2016 @08:57PM (#52263919)

    The neighborhood associations need to hire someone to drive back and forward on the route at 2.5 mph during peek hours.

    • by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:02PM (#52263939) Journal

      The neighborhood associations need to hire someone to drive back and forward on the route at 2.5 mph during peek hours.

      But what about the poke hours?

      • You've peaked my interest with your comment.

      • by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @05:55AM (#52265853) Journal

        You joke but the bedroom community I used to live in does in fact hire "traffic calmers" to essentially drive around during the rush hours 7a-10a, 11:30a-1:30a, 4:30p-6p along the main roots at exactly the speed limit (or slightly less).

        You could always spot them because they were older obviously retirees who could have and would have reasonably avoided going out at those times otherwise.

        I can't say I am in favor of it, but I can say a few things for it.

        1) It did not cost the city much. They paid basically minimum wage + the federal mileage rate. Much cheaper than paying police officers overtime to do more traffic enforcement or hiring more officers.

        2) It probably did improve safety and reduce noise somewhat

        3) As irritating as sitting behind someone doing exactly 25MPH might be, its less irritating than a traffic citation.

        • You joke but the bedroom community I used to live in does in fact hire "traffic calmers" to essentially drive around during the rush hours 7a-10a, 11:30a-1:30a, 4:30p-6p along the main roots at exactly the speed limit (or slightly less).

          Did that include the branches and the trunk routes as well?

        • I live in an older neighborhood with a brick street. Some sections don't have the best maintenance, and directly in front of my house are substantial uneven sections that nearly buckle.

          People who race past my house will loudly smack their undercarriage on the street. I have found car parts from time to time.

          • - A neighborhood could lobby to have pavement replaced with brick or cobblestone. It lasts longer, and is unfriendly to speeders
          • - Absent major street work, ask your city council for more stop signs and
    • by Anonymous Coward

      The neighborhood associations need to hire someone to drive back and forward on the route at 2.5 mph during peek hours.

      Have everyone on the block park as far off the curb in the street as is legal to slow down the traffic.

      Or just find out where Julie Mossler lives and report faster traffic through her neighborhood.

      • by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @10:43PM (#52264507)
        Are you all fucking nuts?

        Those roads do not belong to property owners, residents, or communities (unless hey are private and gated). They belong to the tax-paying public, the owners are those users driving down the road!

        Those cars are getting better gas mileage not sitting in bumper to bumper traffic.

        Those users can get home faster to their families, and so can you since you can drive through some other neighborhoods when traffic backs up.

        The big roads will be a bit clearer if emergency personnel need to get through traffic to save a life.

        If you want the "sanctity" of your own neighborhood, go buy property in a gated community with HOA fees, so you own a part of the street you and your fucking neighbors are demand exclusive rights to. Now get off my lawn!
        • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @12:23AM (#52264905)

          The drivers are going through the neighborhood to route around construction. The root problem is that the construction is taking months to complete. Americans may be surprised, but in many other countries major road repairs are completed in days. I have lived in both China and Japan, where they set up giant illumination lights, and work around the clock in a bustle of activity until the project is done. In America, you just see idle equipment, and occasionally a couple guys in hard hats chatting while drinking coffee. America has the world's most expensive and dysfunctional processes for repairing infrastructure.

        • by Aereus ( 1042228 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @03:19AM (#52265405)
          To be fair, I doubt these residential roads were built with such traffic in mind. Speed limits, intersections, shoulder/easement types, etc. are designed with a certain number of cars per hour in mind. I can see how it could be a safety issue, especially if children are involved (wanting to play outside, but now its a solid line of traffic and the parents don't want to risk their ball going into the road or something)
        • by Half-pint HAL ( 718102 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @04:43AM (#52265663)

          Those roads do not belong to property owners, residents, or communities (unless hey are private and gated). They belong to the tax-paying public, the owners are those users driving down the road!

          Irrelevant -- it is a road with a specific intended purpose, and that purpose is not as a main thoroughfare. In the UK we call residential areas co-opted into mainstream use this way "rat runs", and they are a significant public safety problem. The turn-of-the-century approach to rat runs here was "traffic calming measures" (everything from blocking off one end of the road to speed bumps, cobblestones and choke-points where only one car can pass at a time, with priority given to cars leaving the area) and that was usually only required on fairly straight sections. The only real hazard that it let through was cavalier motorcycle couriers with an intimate local knowledge of backstreets (but even that wasn't much of a problem, as motorcyclists are allowed to "filter" through traffic jams anyway, so are happy to stay on major thoroughfares). Waze and similar speed-aware services now offer every user the knowledge of those motorcycle couriers, and direct people down roads that are not designed for that sort of traffic.

          Your argument is "the roads belong to all of us, so we can do what we like with them", which seems fair enough. But you wouldn't accept that I can dig up a road and melt down the bitumen for resale. Why not? Because that's not what it's there for. The town hall may "belong" to me, but I can't just set up a woodworking studio in it, because that's not what it's there for..

          Now simplistically a road is for "driving on", so this is a controversial case, but if you go to City Hall and check the documents, you'll be able to see what the road's intended usage was, and you'll see that "rat run" is not part of the planned spec.

          • by Ogive17 ( 691899 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @07:22AM (#52266209)
            I would like to add something to your excellent post.

            In theory, the roads to belong to all of us. However depending on your municipality, how the funds for road maintenance are distributed often coincide with how much tax the residents on that road pay.

            When you take a quiet residential street and suddenly increase the volume 100 fold, do you think they are going to take away highway maintenance funds to repair that, especially when it was not meant to be a detour around construction?

            I feel the residents have a very legitimate reason to be upset. Now, who they should be upset with is more easily debated. Patience in our society is gone, everyone looking for a shortcut.
        • by Bert64 ( 520050 )

          It's not as simple as that...

          By increasing congestion on the minor roads, now others (ie those who need to use those minor roads) will take longer to get anywhere and their cars will get worse mileage.

          Taking a minor road to avoid congestion elsewhere only works if not many people are doing it, once you get a significant number of cars on a minor road it will become even more congested than the highway. Highways are designed to carry large numbers of cars, residential streets are not.

        • by Sir Holo ( 531007 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @06:47AM (#52266013)

          Are you all fucking nuts?

          Those cars are getting better gas mileage not sitting in bumper to bumper traffic... Those users can get home faster to their families, and so can you since you can drive through some other neighborhoods when traffic backs up... Now get off my lawn!

          Those cars you mention are hitting pedestrians in my residential neighborhood with increasing frequency. Some of the pedestrians don't get home to their families. EMTs cannot get to them quickly because these side-roads, not intended for dual-lane or heavy traffic, become clotted with traffic when someone gets hit.

          Go piss on your lawn.

          • > Those cars you mention are hitting pedestrians in my residential neighborhood with increasing frequency

            So what you're saying is you have shitty drivers in your city who shouldn't be on the roads at all. Sounds like a bigger problem that needs addressing than just making sure they don't run over *your* neighbors.

    • by msauve ( 701917 )
      "The neighborhood associations need to hire someone to drive back and forward on the route at 2.5 mph during peek hours."

      Hire peeping toms?
    • by eth1 ( 94901 )

      The neighborhood associations need to hire someone to drive back and forward on the route at 2.5 mph during peek hours.

      Except that many places have laws about "obstructing traffic."

      If it's really heavy traffic, what they really need to do is get residents to legally park along both sides of the street during rush hour, so there's only room for one lane of traffic between them. Then several others drive down the street opposing the flow of traffic, get to the bottleneck, and simply refuse to back up (there's really no clear right-of-way), with other residents coming in behind them. Once it backs up from the other direction,

    • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

      Just park trucks on the incoming ends of the streets in question combined with some road work signs.

      The main problem though is the lack of alternate routes for traffic.

  • by thedarb ( 181754 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @08:58PM (#52263923) Homepage

    We are all paying the taxes necessary for you to have a road to your home. So get over it. If it was a private road, that you alone bared the burden of paying for, then Waze wouldn't use it.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Actually you didnt. Im my neighborhood, the homeowners were assessed for the cost of the street via fees paid by the contractor passed on to the buyer.

      So fuck off, dick.

      • Mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Pollux ( 102520 ) <speter AT tedata DOT net DOT eg> on Monday June 06, 2016 @10:38PM (#52264485) Journal

        (Sorry, I don't have any mod points to share.)

        In most "public" neighborhoods, streets are maintained with special assessments []. When I bought my home a few years back, I took over payment of $5,000 in specials for a road repaving project that was done in the neighborhood. I'd be pissed as hell to see a bunch of crazed drivers tearing up the road that my neighborhood had to pay for.

        Besides, our roads weren't engineered to handle thousands of vehicles a day, and our neighborhoods weren't engineered to help traffic navigate the parked cars, kids playing in the street, narrow turns, and unmarked intersections. I sure as hell wouldn't appreciate that kind of traffic next to my home and would organize whatever kind of neighborhood brigade possible to fight it.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by uncqual ( 836337 )

          And, in exchange for excluding "outsiders" who didn't pay a special assessment for your street maintenance, you will agree to stay off all streets which others, but not you, have paid a special assessment for the maintenance of?

          Probably a pretty good trade off for all of us because you likely be unable to go much of anywhere and that will reduce congestion for the rest of us.

          (It will be a damned shame when the homeowners a couple blocks over refuse to let the fire trucks through to your house because the fi

        • Re:Mod parent up (Score:4, Interesting)

          by dfghjk ( 711126 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @07:34AM (#52266283)

          "Besides, our roads weren't engineered to handle thousands of vehicles a day..."

          I wonder how you know these things? These aren't even your roads at all, they are city property.

          I'm confident the roads you talk about weren't "engineered" to handle traffic in any way, they were simply built to accommodate the developers plans and to meet city codes.

          And then there's the "kids playing in the street" excuse. Keep the kids out of traffic. Streets aren't a playground for children, they are for cars driving places.

          If you don't want public access to local streets, you should live somewhere where local roads are privately owned and you should pay extra for the privilege. As is, all you demonstrate is entitlement.

    • by unimacs ( 597299 )
      It depends. Sometimes road repairs are partially covered by local residents through special assessments. A fair amount comes from property taxes. Depending on where the drivers actually live, they may not be paying into the pool of funding for those streets.
      • by msauve ( 701917 )
        Are you speaking with knowledge of this particular location in Maryland, or your own area? Because, local road funding varies between different states in the US. In my area, much of the funding for road maintenance comes from state gas taxes and vehicle registration fees. Gas taxes are paid even by out-of-state drivers, so they end up paying a share.

        Looking at it another way, the neighborhood is seeing more traffic only because a larger road is temporarily under repair. Without that road, they'd be seeing
        • by unimacs ( 597299 )
          I specifically said "It depends" and "sometimes", so no I don't know for sure what the mix of funding sources for road maintenance is in that area. I seriously doubt the poster I was responding to does either when he claimed that "we are all paying the taxes necessary for you to have a road to your home". You said "much of" but your neighborhood would be unusual if most of the road funding comes state gas taxes and registration fees. There was a time when user fees paid for close to 70% of the road mainten
    • by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:17PM (#52264029)
      Yet most places have some rules around preventing cut-throughs. Almost everywhere has some rules that prevent cutting through private property to avoid a traffic control device. Some (but much fewer) have rules preventing cutting through public streets. Yes, they are paid for, but they are also not sized or safe for being used as mass through-ways.
      • Even ignoring safety, the paving of the side roads is not intended for heavy use and will quickly lead to potholes and more money being spent on repairs.

        A big problem is that there's not a lot of traffic enforcement so the speed limits are ignored by the outsiders and a once safe neighborhood becomes dangerous.

    • for the road to handle a certain amount of traffic. In theory if more traffic was expected more money would be spent. In practice we've been cutting infrastructure spending since Regan all in the name of eliminating waste and bureaucracy.

      The private roads are just fine, it's the public ones that are screwed up.
      • by AthanasiusKircher ( 1333179 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @10:37PM (#52264479)

        for the road to handle a certain amount of traffic. In theory if more traffic was expected more money would be spent.

        Actually, if this continues, I imagine what will happen is what happened in my old neighborhood.

        I used to live in a large city that had a lot of residential neighborhoods, and traffic was terrible so people would be tempted to cut through them rather than taking major routes.

        What happened was -- the city adopted a series of rules to actively tie up traffic on residential streets, in an escalating chain of snarling effects.

        I forget what all the stages were, but it was something like:

        - put in more crosswalks, add warning signs, make lanes narrower
        - put in speed zones, create turning restrictions and commercial vehicle restrictions
        - create more one-way streets, have one-way streets terminate in consecutive blocks forcing traffic to wind around in a serpentine fashion
        - if there's still too much traffic, then the badness really started: deliberate choking points, raised intersections, speed humps, etc.
        - and finally the ultimate measures: turn streets into random cul-de-sacs by closing off ends of blocks, or in worst case scenarios institute mid-block street closures

        I know a number of municipalities do this sort of stuff deliberately already to keep traffic out of residential neighborhoods, but it tends mostly to be large cities. If Waze continues to route traffic this way, believe me -- more and more municipalities will catch on and start doing this stuff.

        And having lived in a neighborhood like this for several years, I can say it's a pain in the neck. I'd be required to drive a circuitous serpentine 7-block route just to get home within my neighborhood in an area where I would only have had to go about 2 blocks by walking.

        But it was still much better than having rush-hour traffic going by my front door every morning and evening. The money won't be spent to improve these streets -- it will be to set up barriers to make these streets so awful that people will rather sit in traffic on the highway.

        • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @03:35AM (#52265455)
          That seems like a lot of work. The city I lived in just put up signs closing those streets to anyone except residents during rush hour, and passed a law allowing police to ticket people attempting to cut through those streets. Every rush hour, there'd be at least one police car who'd follow one random car turning into the residential street, to see if they went to a house or if they were using it to bypass traffic.
  • I am incredibly sympathetic to increased traffic in a residential area, in most cases the drivers should be weary of that.

    But then I see Takoma Park as the location. I know this guy's pain. I'm surprised he's not experiencing worse. The "Maryland driver near DC" is why we can't have nice things.

    • Try this: In the summary above, replace "weary homeowner" with "millionaire recluse" and also replace "Timothy Connor" with "Reginald Bottomtooth". Now tell me if you feel bad for this guy.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:06PM (#52263965)

    In the short term, yeah, putting up obstacles and generally making it harder for traffic to come through the side streets will work.

    But in the long term, that's only going to - at best - shift the load to other side streets. In order to fix this problem properly, you need to make the major roads more useful. That means either widening them (which may not be possible, if the area in question is built up - exactly as you'd expect in a large city), or reducing the demand for the roads. Reducing the demand means either encouraging people to car pool (which doesn't work that well; there's a reason people like private vehicles), or introducing alternatives... like large-scale public transport. Heavy rail is best: up to thirty thousand passengers per hour per direction (500 per minute - try getting that volume of traffic on the road!), but is also the most expensive. Light rail is up to about a third of that, but has a number of issues (like, for example, sharing the same roads that are ridiculously congested, in the simplest designs.)

    Town planning is hard. Blaming these apps for these problems is simply blaming another symptom - they didn't create the problem, they're merely making it more obvious.

    • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

      There are other, much less radical solutions that would help a great deal. For example, Texas Turnarounds (eliminating all left turns and most traffic lights) would make major roads a lot more useful.

  • Sorry, Not Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)

    by IonOtter ( 629215 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:06PM (#52263969) Homepage

    If people are driving properly, and obeying the speed limit, then your complaints are groundless. You can kvetch all you want, as that's your right? But unless you buy the street and make it private, then you have to accept it as part and parcel of living in a civilized society.

    • they post signs to bar non-local traffic during construction. A huge amount of extra traffic along roads not designed for it is dangerous. You'll get people driving too fast in places that are usually devoid of traffic (and therefore have lots of kids playing in the street). The correct solution to this is to build more high capacity roads, but after decades of hearing about all the money big gov't wastes nobody wants to talk about infrastructure spending...
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Shados ( 741919 )

      and obeying the speed limit

      If even 20% of cars going through the streets near my place did that, I'd probably be able to sleep an extra hour in the morning. Obeying the speed limits? Lol.

  • Barriers to entry (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:08PM (#52263981)

    We had something like this happen a few years ago.
    Neighborhood kid got flattened because google maps told a trucker the grocery store on the other side of the brickwall at the back of our neighborhood had an entrance running through our neighborhood.

    Solution turned out to be simple. We put up a big construction "road closed" sign at the front of the neighborhood and a signs warning things like "neighborhood traffic only, not a trough street, private road and unauthorized cars will be fined the maximum penalty allowed by law".

    Now days the street isn't even on google maps or waze. You visit us with google maps entire neighborhood is missing. Just a road closed sign.
    Keeps door to door solicitors out too.

  • by wierd_w ( 1375923 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:12PM (#52264005)

    The cities need to sue Waze.

    Residential streets are given lower roadway maintenance budgets because they are designed to handle significantly less traffic than a major roadway does.

    A significant number of Waze users will not be city residents.

    Major roadway maintenance is paid for, at least in part, by state traffic authority funds, extracted from fuel taxes. Residential roads are paid for mostly by taxes on local residents. It is very plausible that excessive redirection down residential streets will pose an undue burden on upkeep costs for the municipality that this happens to, especially with smaller towns.

    Waze is acting in a manner that precludes equitability. It is not being considerate of the consequences of routing large amounts of traffic through residential areas, and further, their public response to the issue has been openly hostile to being considerate in this fashion.

    This means that they need a court to tell them that they need to behave properly in respect to a public commons, or else.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Worse yet are those bastards that publish maps. Rand-McNally for instance needs to be sued out of existance.

    • +1 insightful (too bad I already commented) but this is spot on. When Waze pays the road maintenance taxes then they can bitch.

  • Break up the roads (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Sometimes traffic is not served by having too many routes to each destination. In areas where drivers are getting off of freeways and going onto side streets a lot, it might make sense to petition the town re-design the roads so that cut-through routes aren't possible. Local traffic might have longer drive times to previously connected locations, but overall improvement, due to having only local traffic on local roads.

    However, if you've got months-long road construction projects that aren't bridges over nav

  • At least where I live the city will put speed bumps in as along as most of the people living on the street are OK with it and are willing to pay for them. It's not great for the house living right next to the speed bumps as they have to listen to cars slowing and accelerating.

    There are other traffic calming measures such as making the streets narrower, - even if it's just at intersections. Sometimes you can get the city to post a lower speed limit.
  • I drive a number of days a week a route to get home where highway and residential streets are almost the same length of time, with less variability of time as traffic on the freeway is just one minor indecent away from an extra half hour delay.

    So, I take lots of residential streets. I try not to go too fast, respecting the neighborhoods I go through, just enjoying the houses and the lack of cars in front of me.

    But it's not like Waze is taking me on those routes. To the contrary, if I try to navigate home Waze is every so eager to whip me over to some major road or highway - even though the time estimate of when I might arrive never really varies much if I continue on neighborhood roads.

    Instead the way I find out which way to take is, simply looking at the map and seeing which road goes through to where I'm trying to go.

    So it's not like Waze is directing all of them, lots of people figure this out on their own especially with something like permeant construction - you look for the nearest through road and take it.

    If they really do not like it, speed bumps would probably work to deter most of the drivers, I know it keeps me off some roads I might otherwise go down. But not all of them, there are some roads I drive on every day that have speed bumps, which I tolerate because there simply is no other way through the area...

  • by zerofoo ( 262795 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:30PM (#52264103)

    Taxpayers are driving on taxpayer funded roads, this guy doesn't like it, and Waze is to blame?

    What next? Blaming Amazon for the increase in UPS trucks in the neighborhood?

    If you don't want other people driving on your street, buy a house on a cul de sac.

  • But a couple of junk cars and park them on opposite sides of the street in the middle of the block. That will cause traffic to come to a stop if there is anything above a normal amount of traffic.

    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      And you'll be responsible for their tow and get a fine for having a car without plates or registration parked in the road. Nice try.

  • I wonder if they've used the Waze Map Editor to make sure their street is not marked as a "Primary Street". Waze isn't supposed to route to Streets, only Primary Streets.

    • I did a map search for "Elm Avenue, Takoma Park, Maryland", expecting to see something other than the narrow, obviously residential street it is. If hundreds of cars are being detoured there by Waze, that needs to be corrected. But I'm still leery of drawing conclusions based on anecdote; and the reporter seems to be just taking the guys word for it. I'm wondering if it's just an extra car or two a minute, in which case that shouldn't be problematic except when you're trying to play basketball in the street

  • It's really nice that some guy bought a house (or rents) and while his property ends at the property line, typically prior to the sidewalk if there is one, his sense of entitlement doesn't stop there, no it goes all the way to the other side of the street and then up and down the whole area.

    Public streets are built by taxpayer-funded public funds and they are for EVERYONE's good. That includes the self-entitled guy who lives in that little house that posts false reports on Waze, and it includes EVERYONE el

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Shados ( 741919 )

      There's also long studies made to make sure the streets are safe with the given expected traffic, choke points, traffic, and the fire department has to check it out to make sure it's okay in case of an emergency. It's not an exact science, but shit like this can seriously fuck things up.

      Add that a lot of buildings and roads are built on pure corruption (things that really should not have been built gets built on "special" permits that skip normal rules, etc), and you end up with no one being happy.

      Then you

    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      Property lines typically include the sidewalk and sometimes portions of the street - basically up until the main sewage line for me (the city doesn't want to be responsible for 'my' portion of the sewage line).

  • Lobby the municipality. Get some stop signs and speed breakers approved.

    In my commute I know a good short cut. But it has three speed breakers. I value my brake pads, and fuel too. I take the long way around, may be half a mile longer, but easy on the brakes and easy on the gas.

  • Edit The Map (Score:5, Informative)

    by pgn674 ( 995941 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @09:50PM (#52264225) Homepage
    The article made no mention on whether the homeowner checked the Waze Map Editor [] to make sure his and the surrounding roads were marked correctly. For example, a road marked [] as a Primary Street type will be favored by the algorithms over a road marked as a Street type.
    If the information is wrong, then fix it yourself, and change the routes of thousands of people. This is the correct way to combat inappropriate Waze routes: Make sure Waze's map data match the quality and capacity of the carefully laid out roadways. If the roadway capacities are not laid out well, then your problem is not Waze.
  • by taustin ( 171655 ) on Monday June 06, 2016 @10:00PM (#52264291) Homepage Journal

    The problem is that Waze has a reason to exist. The problem is cities, counties and states that allow two day road repairs to take six months. If they'd make the construction crews do their job correctly, Waze would cease to exist within a few months, because the main thruways wouldn't be clogged up all the time and nobody would care.

  • Many streets have 'Do Not Enter' signs during commuter times and speed humps. You will get ticketed. They were being used similarly to bypass congested main routes. Get your traffic bureaucrats involved. []

    • ...And if I get ticketed for driving on a street my tax dollars payed for, I'm suing the city responsible into insolvency.

      A city near me in South Florida tried that for a bit. They got smacked down HARD. As they should have.

"Right now I feel that I've got my feet on the ground as far as my head is concerned." -- Baseball pitcher Bo Belinsky