141
I like the traffic light indicators on the floor when I look at my phone (piefed.jeena.net)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by jeena@piefed.jeena.net to c/casualconversation@lemm.ee
61 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Normally when you need to wait at a crossing because it's red you take out your phone to waste some time. But you have to be quite anxious and look up if it's already green or not, otherwise you miss the green light.

But they help you out with that here in Korea by building in the traffic light into the curb. You're looking down on your phone and see the red line left and right of it. Once it changes to green you immediately are aware of it because it's in your field of view constantly.

Great invention!

I took the background picture just outside and put the stock picture hands with a phone on top of it so you can easier visualize it how it looks like in reality.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] i_dont_want_to@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 hours ago

In my city, some intersections you would wait maybe more than 5 minutes for the light to change if you're not downtown. Then again, I wasn't on my phone for this wait. Annoyingly, these pedestrian signals didn't have any sound when they changed, where downtown did.

Downtown wasn't so bad, though. You might still wait longer than a minute, but usually not.

this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
141 points (90.3% liked)

Casual Conversation

3175 readers
295 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.

RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
orangeNgreen@lemmy.world
neidu2@feddit.nl
BoozeOrWater@lemm.ee