I am running into these more and more....

Example:

I've read up on them
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverg...nd_interchange
http://www.divergingdiamond.com/
but I still don't quite get it.

The ones I've driven through lately seem to me to be slower than usual (from drivers -- like me? -- slowing down because it seems so very odd and even scary) and it appears there is no possibility that the crossing street under/over can ever NOT have a red light.

Are these really safer? Are there folks who like them? Enlighten me

This is also new to me. They seem safer but require driver education. The same issue with traffic circles in the US. Found this video to be very helpful:

The common core of highway interchanges....everyone hates it, they keep on building them.

Without getting into OMNI territory, you're incorrect on both counts.

People don't like change. When things make sense, despite the reluctance to change, it makes sense to implement them anyway. People will learn how to deal.

It is safer as you can see, it removes all of the left turns that involve crossing an opposing direction of traffic. Left turns across an opposing direction of traffic are a major source of traffic accidents. I've seen several of these in the greater St. Louis area as well, and I hope places add more of them.

It's really just taking the single-point urban interchange and extending it out to allow a larger straight bridge section. I've been surprised that, when driving, the diverging diamond was much less confusing than I expected.

Because they're more efficient. "I don't want to change" isn't a reason not tim make improvements.

If it ain't broke....make it better.

This is the first I've heard of these. I'd have to drive through one to really get a sense of it, but my first impression is that they'll confuse the hell out of most people. And they seem intended for interstates, which by definition get a lot of non-local traffic, so while locals may get used to them, the transient traffic which frequents them will still have to deal with the WTH factor.

It's definitely safer than a traditional diamond interchange, eliminating the left turns across traffic. I just wonder how much safer. With many safety features, there comes a point of diminishing returns, where the added safety is small enough to not be worth the negatives associated with them.

Here's my concern with this design (just based on the linked video): A traditional diamond forces left-turning traffic to turn across opposing traffic, leading to t-bone collisions. The DDI eliminates those collisions. But it also poses the danger of unfamiliar or distracted drivers bearing right at the signals, directly into oncoming traffic - which will cause head-on collisions. So, will the number of headers equal or exceed the number of t-bones that were prevented by the DDI?

I drove through one the first time and got thrown off slightly (and I'm from MA, the land of rotaries/traffic circles/random lane drops/old layouts). But, just follow the signs and one should be fine. The roads are overengineered in the turns to force people to see that clearly they should continue in a forward direction without turning (for those wishing to continue "straight through" from one side to another).

You're correct that it would be rare to get through one of these intersections without a red light. A conventionally signaled intersection makes this possible at the cost of a) longer average wait times because the signals have six phases rather than two, and b) a higher theoretical accident rate.

I assume the actual accident rate for DDI's has yet to be established reliably for lack of data.

I've read that left turns across traffic (in drive-on-right countries) are the most dangerous driving maneuvers. The DDI eliminates them.

Here's a video showing a driver navigating a DDI in Columbus, Ohio.

The first time I started through one, in Branson, Missouri, I went "what the heck is this?" And once I was through it, I went "well that actually makes sense."

They are building at least one where I live. I'm actually looking forward to it, as currently the lines to make left turns onto the interstate (at both ends) make it impossible to get through the intersection reasonably. It shouldn't take 30 minutes merely to cross an interstate on a 4 lane road - when a couple blocks either side of the interstate the traffic on the road is flowing freely.

I went through the one on i-85 in Atlanta last week. I noticed that everyone was stopping before turning left onto the interstate which mucked things up since it's a protected left.

The DDI in Columbus has lanes that bulge away from each other. These increase the angle opposite traffic lanes cross at, making the intersection feel almost like a typical cross-street intersection. Is the Atlanta interchange built that way?

even if they continue to research interchanges, i dont understand why the concept of traffic lights cannot evolve into something without always having regular intervals

Large numbers of traffic-light systems in the US use variable control systems. These continually adjust the signal patterns based on traffic. My guess is that a large majority of car-to-signal encounters are in this type of system, but I have no idea where to look for actual information to back that up.