Many dark pattern designers, would claim 'bad design' as the excuse. Its hard to read intent, and hard not to suspect malicious intent when there is a cash value on the upside of the 'bad design'.
I have another one - when you pay cash at a machine, and it does not give you the best change, but gives you the heaviest change. Oh and 4-way traffic management guaranteed to cause a huge traffic jam in the name of health and safety, when cars and drivers (and pedestrians) would better manage the road themselves without any assistance. (I suspect the traffic management is training for us to get used to degrading of the roads, so that 'self-driving' cars are able to navigate diversions cos of the traffic lights.)
> it does not give you the best change, but gives you the heaviest change.
"Best change" is an ambiguous term, but also subjective.
> 4-way traffic management guaranteed to cause a huge traffic jam in the name of health and safety, when cars and drivers (and pedestrians) would better manage the road themselves without any assistance.
This, too, is highly debatable and subjective. Ask a pedestrian trying to cross a busy road if there should be signals, or someone trying to make a left across two or more opposing lanes of traffic.
I think you're blaming the wrong thing. High traffic areas all have something in common, and its not traffic signals: it's traffic jams caused by too many cars trying to squeeze into a too-small channel.
I have another one - when you pay cash at a machine, and it does not give you the best change, but gives you the heaviest change. Oh and 4-way traffic management guaranteed to cause a huge traffic jam in the name of health and safety, when cars and drivers (and pedestrians) would better manage the road themselves without any assistance. (I suspect the traffic management is training for us to get used to degrading of the roads, so that 'self-driving' cars are able to navigate diversions cos of the traffic lights.)