If everyone knew about zipper merging there would be no early mergers (and 'late mergers' don't exist within the context of zipper merging).
I may be overly optimistic, but I think a sign saying "use both lanes and zipper merge at end" would do a lot.
The real problem is accountability. There is none of it(as cops can't be everywhere, all the time) so people end up exercising what little power they do have in order to punish those they view as the abusers.
However, educating people does allow them to make better decisions.
Rules themselves aren't always the best/optimal/safest solution either and being loose may be the best solution.
For example, in one country in Asia if you are "in-front" of someone you have the right to merge/enter a roadway/get on a free way/change lanes over the person already in the lane. This is just cultural and is so much better than what we have in the west (like the USA). If someone changes lanes and "hits you", it is your fault (unless you were in-front of them).
Makes it so much easier to get on the free way, change lanes, etc. as you only have to worry about what is in front of you. Not what is in front of you, behind you, next to you, etc. There are no "blind spots" etc.
I agree. But note that the idea of Zipper merging is when traffic has already slowed down, not when it is still moving.
Obviously when you're going 100 km/h, the ideal merge point is significantly farther back than when it's stop and go. Nobody is saying you should wait until you're 20 feet from the barrier and then swerve into the other lane. But it's not like that's unique to this situation.
If you move the merge point back, then by definition it becomes an early merge, right? I don't understand your disagreement with what seems like a totally reasonable statement by Justin.
If you define "late" as "the latest point at which you can safely merge without causing negative traffic reactions (e.g. by forcing someone to brake)" then zipper/late merging is better than "moving over as soon as you can", even in light traffic.
It is optimal only when the local driving culture allows it to be.
I live in an area where drivers are extremely selfish and the police don't seem to spend a lot of time ticketing bad drivers, so zipper merging typically doesn't work here.
Yeah, which is why almost the entire article was about the campaigns to change the culture, not about justifying zipper merging as optimal.
Those campaigns in Washington and Minnesota just wouldn't fly here.
When our metro population was around <=3M, people still zipper merged (in the mid 90s and earlier).
This is backwards. Zipper merging doesn't work when drivers attempt to be unselfish by merging early, which results in vigilante lane blockage of those who weren't as considerate. In other words, I'm not being selfish when I block late mergers; I'm enacting justice on other people who were being selfish.
The system works when all parties recognize that the best thing for everyone is to merge late.
One of the reasons why people early merge here is that many people don't let mergers in. And one of the reasons why people don't let mergers in is that they regularly get cut off by a second car after letting a merger in. It's a vicious circle.
Back in "the day", zipper merging wasn't even an issue. A lot of people early merge here because they'd rather be the one letting people in than hoping to be let in.