Similarly though, I wonder what would happen after a weeklong publicized clamp down on blocking the box.
It will never be fully predictable: people make mistakes. It is always safer and better to assume that someone will do something unpredictable like run a red light. It could even be because of mechanical error.
When riding motorcycles in ~~Asia~~ some asian countries (did it for 6 years), you assume that people will run the red light. It happens, during rush hour, 100% of the time.
So, you drive appropriately and it is safer because of that.
Edit: changed Asia to some asian countries. I didn't want to be specific but ended up being to general which was wrong.
So rather than assume that the other drivers have come to the same conclusion that I have, I make it explicit by waving. Sometimes it's a little confusing if they try to wave you at the same time, but that's life.
So waving through someone who's not actively crossing is not correctly yielding the right of way. OTOH, drivers should bloody well expect pedestrians to start crossing in front of them when you haven't stopped yet (both states say that a pedestrian may not step out if there is inadequate room for the car to react and stop; by the contrapositive a pedestrian may step out in front of a car if there is adequate distance.)
Always be mindful of the people you're going to be making wait, though.
Better have good insurance. Defensively driving is the best way to avoid accidents and collisions. Always assume the other party will do something wrong, and you will be far safer because of it.
Imho, 4-way stops are terrible no matter how you slice it: in heavy traffic they're really inefficient not to mention difficult to navigate, and should be replaced with a traffic light. In light traffic they're also inefficient, and should be replaced with a yield from the non-dominant direction.
In Sweden the default rule at an unsigned intersection is that you yield to the right. This means there's a well-defined algorithm for conflict resolution without putting stop signs at every little intersection. Apparently the idea that you could possibly navigate an intersection without signage is absurd to Americans, though.
There are very clear right-of-way rules for this situation, and if both drivers can manage to remember those simple rules, no hand signals will be needed.
For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. If they're chasing a suspect or heading to a crime scene I'll forgive it, but they usually aren't in a hurry and are actually ignorant of the law they are supposed to enforce.
As a pedestrian I have been hit multiple times by cyclists on a sidewalk and in fact when I was in high school I knocked a pedestrian down pretty hard when I was rolling down a steep hill.
You know, this one I understand entirely. When I walk on a road without sidewalks, I always walk on the wrong side of the road, so I can see what's coming and whether they're paying attention. Getting mowed down from behind by someone not looking where they're going isn't on my bucket list.
If you ride with traffic and get hit, your relative speed at collision will be 15 mph and the collision will push you away from the car.
If you ride against traffic and get hit, you're dealing with a head-on collision at 45 mph relative speed.
That's why I always ride with traffic.
If you are going to stay on the road with other vehicles: You _never_ ride against traffic. Drivers are less likely to see you if you are biking where they normally don't anticipate any traffic. Even in a rural environment, biking with the flow of traffic gives the driver better visual cues that something else is on the road (you) and they have more time to plan their approach. It also gives them more time to find something appropriate to throw at you.
If you ride against traffic, then you still "don't see" the vehicles that are going in the same direction as you, and you are now on their left. Sure, they're on the opposite side of the road, but you don't know if they are paying attention or what. Thus: no more safety gained by riding on the opposite side of the road, where you aren't supposed to be.
The most dangerous area is, obviously, an intersection, where being on the wrong side of the road is demonstrably less safe[1]. After that, it's the blind spot over the crest of a hill. If you are going against the flow of traffic, you will be moving your slowest when you are in that blind spot. Moving with the flow of traffic -> moving quickly through that blind spot.
Knowing when a vehicle is coming up behind you, with plenty of time to react if necessary, is solved with a $12 helmet mirror.
Pedestrians, in the absence of sidewalks, do have the option to face incoming or outgoing traffic, and the usual choice is to face oncoming traffic as you suggested.
Additionally, the increase in speed differential (which is much more significant for cyclists than pedestrians) created by cycling towards oncoming traffic greatly reduces available reaction time of both parties.
When you are travelling in the same direction as the traffic there is usually still a speed differential but it is substantially less. While you no longer have the ability to see potential problems "coming at you", drivers have significantly more time to notice you and react accordingly.
Lesson learned: I'm the best driver in the world!