HackerTubewatch
Surprise me
Frame from Stop Signs Suck and We Should Get Rid of Them Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed

Stop Signs Suck and We Should Get Rid of Them

46 videos recommended on HN
YouTube
4 HN users recommended this explainer3 months2022–2024 score 3.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026

Cited in threads about cyclist safety and traffic law as an explanation of why removing stop signs can improve safety.

Not Just Bikes argues that stop signs are a poor traffic control, drawing on Dutch practice and the Idaho stop to show intersections can be safer without them, especially for cyclists.

“Here is a great video about life without stop signs in the Netherlands” (HN, 2022)

1 strong recommendations · 3 recommendations · 1 citations · Explainers

5 Hacker News comments

From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.

@xputer Aug 2022 Strongly recommends
on HN thread Electric vehicles are way more energy-efficient than internal combustion
Read more
If there's that much traffic, a four way stop will be even worse than a roundabout. You'll need a turbo roundabout, traffic lights or grade separated intersections in that case. Four way stops are one of the dumbest inventions of man kind that are way over used in North America. Everyone has to stop all the time and it leads to scary situations at 2 way stops because people don't expect those anymore. Here is a great video about life without stop signs in the Netherlands: [this video] And here are some infinitely better alternatives: Low traffic + low speed: raised intersections where right goes first. Medium traffic + medium speed: priority road with yield signs on side streets and roundabouts High traffic + medium speed: traffic lights High traffic + high speed: grade separated intersections
Great video on life without stop signs in the Netherlands.
@aqme28 Apr 2022 Recommends
on HN thread The Colorado Safety Stop is the law of the land
> Not saying its a bad idea, but I'm still struggling to see the full logic of it. If you don't have to stop at an intersection, you get through the intersection much faster and are therefore in less danger. This is true for all vehicles but especially true of bicycles, which don't always accelerate as fast. Here's a video demonstration [this video]
Demonstrates why not stopping at intersections can be safer for cyclists.
@rsanek Apr 2022 Recommends
on HN thread The Colorado Safety Stop is the law of the land
It's counter-intuitive, but the data [0][1] is quite clear that laws like these significantly improve safety for bicyclists. I found this video [2] useful in understanding what might be going on. [0] [link] ("All reported injury crashes involving bicycles at stop sign controlled intersections dropped 23% in the 30 months after adopting the Safety Stop compared to 30 months prior to adoption") [1] [link] ("In year after adopting the “Idaho Stop,” crashes between bicyclists and motorists fell 14.5%, and Boise was 30-60% safer on a bicycle compared to similarly sized cities") [2] [this video]
Helps understand why safety-stop laws improve bicyclist safety.
@ruuda Feb 2024 Recommends
on HN thread Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say
Everybody here is discussing the car and the cyclist, but I don't see anybody considering the possibility that the intersection design is unsafe. That there is a stop sign is a pretty bad signal in itself, Not Just Bikes made a video explaining this: [this video]
Explains why stop-sign intersection design is unsafe

Citations, criticism and jokes

@medvezhenok Sep 2024 Cites it
on HN thread Amazon bans its drivers from moving their own lips too much at work
Read more
No, I think stop signs are a horrible design flaw that we have to live with, and rolling stops are the least bad way to work around that urban design flaw. It is asinine to force arbitrary stops at random intersections that have no time-of-day or traffic sensitivity (i.e. am I alone on the roads at 2AM, or are children walking to school at 8AM). Or to put them at intersections with clear cross visibility (what exactly is the stop for?). Or the 4-way stop sign mess. It is totally reasonable to require full stops in the latter case, but silly in the former. Unfortunately, stop signs make no distinction between the two. The only reason to fully stop at stop signs is actually the a pillar / b pillar blind spots, or obstructed view from the road. If you were hypothetically driving an open top car in an open neighborhood (or a motorcycle, bike, scooter, moped), there's no new "information" you'll gain by fully stopping rather than slowing down (where as if you have an A/B pillar blind spot, a full stop can give someone time to appear from behind it). See also: "Stop Signs suck and we should get rid of them" [this video]
Argues stop signs are a poor design

Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.

Keyboard shortcuts

/
Search
j k
Next / previous video
r
Surprise me
l
Like (video page)
w
Watch later (video page)
?
This help
Esc
Close