Can’t we have any threads without arguing about the gay agenda?
Regards,
Shodan
In a democracy it’s the authority of we the people, right? If enough people cared we could campaign for some other color scheme but I think a lot of confused people would die during the transition.
Sort of off the topic (such as it is), my Japanese teacher once regaled the class with a lecture on the superiority of Japanese traffic lights which tend to be horizontal, saying I think that the color on the far left was chosen for that position because you could see it in your peripheral vision better than other colors. So we could add a discussion to this thread about using the same colors we always have but putting them upside down!
I’m relatively sure this is a parody of Libertarians. Either that or a good example of Poe’s law in action.
The electorate’s authority. In other words, yours.
But admit it. Those traffic lights would look fabulous.
There’s a more comprehensive discussion of the history of the colors of traffic lights in, of all things, Marvin Harris’ book Cultural Materialism: Towards a Science of Culture. Harris was criticizing anthropologists who came up with what he saw as airy-fairy theories about where the choices came from based on the spectrum or something, and responded with a close examination of the historic record.
Because, as has already been pointed out by other posters, if you don’t you will probably die horribly. Possibly not a big loss, but you will also most likely kill someone else who’s only crime is that you decided to be a contrarian and do your own thing.
-XT
I saw what you did there.
The strategy where you obey the traffic light is a correlated equilibrium of the appropriate game (which isn’t too hard to write down, but requires a little bit beyond basic game theory). It’s very likely Pareto optimal, so you’re never going to find a better strategy, and you should actually follow the lights.
But where would it end? We wouldn’t be saluting the Red, White and Blue of Old Glory, it’d be Pink, Cream and Aqua!
It’s comforting to know that obeying the traffic lights can be shown, mathematically, to be the preferred strategy. I was worried there for a minute. 
To be completely fair, the model I’m using assumes that there’s always another car waiting to cross in each direction after the current one passes, and that you can see this. In a more realistic model, the optimal strategy will become more complicated, but it’ll still have you obeying the light most of the time.
The optimal strategy would include the case where you have a red light but you can’t see another vehicle on the road, and converse case, where you have a green light, but the intersection is completely blocked by cars.
Let’s have a vote – “go” shall be defined as “yellow”; “stop” shall be defined as “red”. Traffic lights shall have two fuctions, go and stop. 
Hear, hear! In a truly free society, the strong would decide for themselves what the colors mean and it would be up to them to persuade or force the sheep of the populace to sign on to their interpretations. Whichever interpretation bested the others in the free market of ideas would become the standard.
The imposition of a color code by which one is “allowed” to operate or not operate one’s own property is a violation of the fundamental principles of individual sovereignty and self-ownership, and represents no less than an act of aggression by the state. In a truly ideal world, the flow of traffic will be naturally regulated by market forces.
Red was chosen for “Stop!” because, at the time, it was the color believed to best get a driver’s attention.
However, recent studies revealed that a specific yellow/green hue was most effective – but since red lights & stop signs are so ingrained into our culture, the brightest color’s usage is limited to fire engines and school crosswalk signs.
Regulation of color is theft.
No, proper tea is theft.
Contradicting me is theft.