@mondoman712
Best driving experience in the world? The Netherlands, because when you shift a significant number of people off the roads into alternative transport the remaining drivers have less traffic and higher average speeds than an over-reliance on cars.
Risak is just committing the same mistake Robert Moses made 80 - 50 years ago, building more roads to “solve” traffic but it just induced more car traffic - - and then repeat again and again.
Do you have a good source? Not denying, just on the lockout for stuff to shove in diehard motorists’ faces that they will struggle to deny with anything coming anywhere close to resembling facts
Adding extra capacity to a network when the moving entities selfishly choose their route can in some cases reduce overall performance. That is because the Nash equilibrium of such a system is not necessarily optimal. The network change induces a new game structure which leads to a (multiplayer) prisoner’s dilemma. In a Nash equilibrium, drivers have no incentive to change their routes. While the system is not in a Nash equilibrium, individual drivers are able to improve their respective travel times by changing the routes they take. In the case of Braess’s paradox, drivers will continue to switch until they reach Nash equilibrium despite the reduction in overall performance.
@mondoman712
Best driving experience in the world? The Netherlands, because when you shift a significant number of people off the roads into alternative transport the remaining drivers have less traffic and higher average speeds than an over-reliance on cars.
Risak is just committing the same mistake Robert Moses made 80 - 50 years ago, building more roads to “solve” traffic but it just induced more car traffic - - and then repeat again and again.
Do you have a good source? Not denying, just on the lockout for stuff to shove in diehard motorists’ faces that they will struggle to deny with anything coming anywhere close to resembling facts
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess's_paradox