On a sunny day (Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:23:30 -0700) it happened NotReallyMe <nrm@vallidatedsoftware.com> wrote in <b775gjFnccgU1@mid.individual.net>:>Tim Wescott wrote: >> Like a good percentage of human males, I'm partially color blind to green >> and red. In my case, it's enough that I can't tell the difference >> between a green or a red LED -- so a piece of equipment that depends on >> the operator being able to see the color of a bi-color LED is totally >> useless to me. >> >> Needless to say, this is irritating. >> >> Does anyone on the group know how many people are really, truly tone >> deaf? I don't just mean unable to hear when they're playing out of tune, >> but people who are unable to tell the difference between a "beep" and a >> "boop" when it's coming out of a piece of electronic equipment? >> >> I'm thinking of communicating status via a beeper, and for obvious >> reasons I don't want to do the same "bicolor LED" crap to someone, only >> with sound. >> >Too lazy to read all the posts, but a 1 second long solid tone is very >different from 3 short tones. > >Or as they use in the movies, blink (beep) once for yes, twice for no. > >Scottbeep beep beep
Tone Deafness
Started by ●August 14, 2013
Reply by ●August 16, 20132013-08-16
Reply by ●August 16, 20132013-08-16
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 19:55:32 -0400, Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:>On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:48:03 -0700, the renowned Charlie E. ><edmondson@ieee.org> wrote: > >>On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:30:20 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso" >><tomd_u1@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >> >>> >>>Tim Wescott wrote: >>>> Like a good percentage of human males, I'm partially color blind to >>>> green and red. In my case, it's enough that I can't tell the >>>> difference between a green or a red LED -- so a piece of equipment >>>> that depends on the operator being able to see the color of a >>>> bi-color LED is totally useless to me. >>>> >>>> Needless to say, this is irritating. >>>> >>>> Does anyone on the group know how many people are really, truly tone >>>> deaf? I don't just mean unable to hear when they're playing out of >>>> tune, but people who are unable to tell the difference between a >>>> "beep" and a "boop" when it's coming out of a piece of electronic >>>> equipment? >>>> >>>> I'm thinking of communicating status via a beeper, and for obvious >>>> reasons I don't want to do the same "bicolor LED" crap to someone, >>>> only with sound. >>> >>>Everyone can tell beep-beep from beep. >>> >>>My car is programmed to wait until it is going pretty fast, and then sound >>>GONG-GONG-GONG (yeah, 3 times and loud) to make the driver jump. "Oh, no. >>>Something serious." The info display gives details. "Washer fluid low." >> >>Even better is my car. When it hits around an eighth of a tank, it >>'stutters', i.e. it reduces the throttle for a few moments, so that >>you are aware that you are getting low on gas, but are not on reserve >>yet. It is fun enough when you are just cruising down the road to >>suddenly start slowing down for no apparent reason, but if you happen >>to be accellerating, say from a stop at a red light, it will actually >>kill the engine! Real fun to find your self stopping dead in the >>middle of a busy intersection trying to get your car to start again >>(What? Did you remember you need to be in Park to start the car?) >>while cars going the other way are zipping around you... > >What make has this lovely bit of firmware? > >Many seem to just quit, no warning, presumably to protect the >injectors from clogging due to crud at the bottom of the tank. > > >Best regards, >Spehro PefhanyIt is a 2005 VW Jetta!
Reply by ●August 16, 20132013-08-16
Michael A. Terrell wrote:> Nico Coesel wrote: > > > > "Tom Del Rosso" <tomd_u1@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > My car is programmed to wait until it is going pretty fast, and > > > then sound GONG-GONG-GONG (yeah, 3 times and loud) to make the > > > driver jump. "Oh, no. Something serious." The info display > > > gives details. "Washer fluid low." > > > > better then a similar alert it is so cold the road could be > > slippery... > > > Dirty enough windows could get you killed. Ever had a big truck hit > some mud and splatter so much on your windows that you can't see > anything?So maybe it could sound off when stopped, instead of creating the impression it's the sort of thing that breaks at higher speeds. -- Reply in group, but if emailing remove the last word.
Reply by ●August 17, 20132013-08-17
Tom Del Rosso wrote:> > Michael A. Terrell wrote: > > Nico Coesel wrote: > > > > > > "Tom Del Rosso" <tomd_u1@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > My car is programmed to wait until it is going pretty fast, and > > > > then sound GONG-GONG-GONG (yeah, 3 times and loud) to make the > > > > driver jump. "Oh, no. Something serious." The info display > > > > gives details. "Washer fluid low." > > > > > > better then a similar alert it is so cold the road could be > > > slippery... > > > > > > Dirty enough windows could get you killed. Ever had a big truck hit > > some mud and splatter so much on your windows that you can't see > > anything? > > So maybe it could sound off when stopped, instead of creating the impression > it's the sort of thing that breaks at higher speeds.LCD displays are cheap enough that they could use one to display the actual problem rather than just an idiot light that says 'CHECK ENGINE'. A 16x2 would do, but a 20x4 would be better. Use the aural alarm to alert you to the problem, with one of two distinct signals for immediate problems, and ones that need attention soon. If the engine is low on oil, or overheating you can't wait. Other low fluids can damage the vehicle, but I don't need a 'CHECK ENGINE' light coming on to tell me the Freon level is low. If it's already lit for that minor problem, it can't alert you to more important things. -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Reply by ●August 17, 20132013-08-17
Jan Panteltje wrote:> > beep beep beepOr as While E. Coyote once said to the Road Runner, "Beep! Beep!, your @#$%^ ass!" <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Wile_E_Coyote.gif> -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Reply by ●August 17, 20132013-08-17
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 21:47:52 -0700, Don Y wrote:>> Actually there is more than one document. I recommned starting with >> mil- std-1472. There are also nice IBM documents on Commom User >> Interface standrds that are quite useful. > > The problem is these aren't designed with the entire population in mind. > E.g., a fighter pilot in combat is far more focused (and motivated! :> > ) than a 70 year old retiree with failing hearing, vision, attention, > etc. Or, someone with a hearing impairment...While it is focused military applications a lot of what it has to say is quite generally applicapable. While is does not much deal with people with impaiments it does address environmental interference.> > I've canvassed lots of research papers trying to sort out how these > sorts of things affect "real people". And, coerced different people to > be guinea pigs as I tested out various approaches. Not very scientific > and no "hard and fast rules". E.g., how often can a person be > "interrupted"? How far apart in space can those cues be sited? How do > you manage the inevitable "overload"? > > But, it brought me to the "three layer" model which also seems intuitive > (and, very easy for most people to relate to -- as they ultimately will > have to configure it!)Couuld you expand a bit on the three layer model?> >> Standards is just one of the things i do usefully well. > > I'll chase it down. Thanks!
Reply by ●August 17, 20132013-08-17
Hi Joseph, On 8/17/2013 9:36 AM, josephkk wrote:> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 21:47:52 -0700, Don Y wrote: > >>> Actually there is more than one document. I recommned starting with >>> mil- std-1472. There are also nice IBM documents on Commom User >>> Interface standrds that are quite useful. >> >> The problem is these aren't designed with the entire population in mind. >> E.g., a fighter pilot in combat is far more focused (and motivated! :> >> ) than a 70 year old retiree with failing hearing, vision, attention, >> etc. Or, someone with a hearing impairment... > > While it is focused military applications a lot of what it has to say is > quite generally applicapable. While is does not much deal with people > with impaiments it does address environmental interference.Agreed. I'm just saying that designing to standards like this is pretty much like designing for what a "nominal" person is expected to be -- not really the population as a whole. (E.g., young children, elderly, folks with various "disabilities", etc. aren't addressed, here)>> I've canvassed lots of research papers trying to sort out how these >> sorts of things affect "real people". And, coerced different people to >> be guinea pigs as I tested out various approaches. Not very scientific >> and no "hard and fast rules". E.g., how often can a person be >> "interrupted"? How far apart in space can those cues be sited? How do >> you manage the inevitable "overload"? >> >> But, it brought me to the "three layer" model which also seems intuitive >> (and, very easy for most people to relate to -- as they ultimately will >> have to configure it!) > > Couuld you expand a bit on the three layer model?I think I explained it up-thread. But, basically, treat audio as existing in three "layers": - background is stuff that we know is there yet essentially "ignore". Like conversations happening around us IN WHICH WE ARE NOT PARTICIPANTS. Or, "background music". Or, the TV chattering away while you are doing something else. It's there; you recognize that it's there; you'd notice if it suddenly went missing; you *might* catch something of interest "happening" in that layer (e.g., if you manage to hear folks talking about *you*!); but, for the most part, you ignore it. - foreground/focus is that with which you are actively engaged. The conversation you are participating in. A TV broadcast you are listening to (over the background noise of other conversations nearby). A musical score. You are PAYING ATTENTION to its content as you are "interested" in it (at least, for the moment). - distractions/annunciators/interruptions/alerts. An asynchronous layer of events that compete for your attention/focus. A young kid wandering into the room while you're watching TV asking for something to eat. A phone ringing. Doorbell. Fire alarm. etc. Each tries to distract your "focus" and become your *new* focus. Thinking in this sort of framework, a user's abilities can then be mapped to relative volume levels (if the background is too loud, you can't concentrate on the focus/foreground; if an annunciator is too soft, it won't stand out against the foreground and background; etc.) and temporal/physical displacements (annunciators occurring too close to each other in time/space can't be successfully and reliably resolved -- you are "overloaded" by too many distractions). I.e., it takes some amount of "processing power" to "register" an annunciator (interruption), recognize what it signifies, and then evaluate that significance in the context of your current "focus" (do I really want to be bothered answering that phone call, now?). A *second* interruption occurring before a previous interruption has been "handled" rapidly overloads your ability to *remember* which interruptions are "enqueued" (remember, an interruption need not be a persistent sound: "the dyer signal went off", "someone rang the doorbell", "dinner is ready", etc.). And, how close together such events can be for a *particular* individual varies -- with the individual (some folks are a bit more sluggish to react), with the current focus (dealing with an interruption while totally engrossed in an activity vs. just casually watching TV), with the nature and familiarity of the alert ("what the hell is that sound?"). While a particular person may not be able to decide, a priori, how close together (in time/space) alerts can occur for his/her abilities, he/she can still relate to the idea of dealing with sound on these three "layers". It doesn't require a technical description of how the brain processes sound, The Cocktail Party Effect, etc. I contend that a successful audio display (is defined as) provides an effective way for the user (listener) to manage that "alert" layer of events -- swapping them into his "focus", etc. And, building a predictable framework that minimizes the need for the user to "remember" what has occurred (but been ignored/deferred). [I think we are better able to remember visual events than aural ones -- we have "language" that comes to our aid to distill a visual image into a summary of what it represents. Audio events aren't always as easily and deterministically distilled ("it was a beep of some sort"; "it was a screeching sort of sound"; etc.) So, you have to take care to give the user some way of quickly "resolving" the nature of an alert ("it was the telephone ringing"; "it was the doorbell"; "it sounded like water running"; "IT CAME FROM OVER THERE"; etc.) so he doesn't have to try to remember the actual *sound*] Make sense?
Reply by ●August 18, 20132013-08-18
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 04:26:57 -0400, Michael A. Terrell wrote:> > LCD displays are cheap enough that they could use one to display the > actual problem rather than just an idiot light that says 'CHECK ENGINE'. > A 16x2 would do, but a 20x4 would be better. Use the aural alarm to > alert you to the problem, with one of two distinct signals for immediate > problems, and ones that need attention soon. If the engine is low on > oil, or overheating you can't wait. Other low fluids can damage the > vehicle, but I don't need a 'CHECK ENGINE' light coming on to tell me > the Freon level is low. If it's already lit for that minor problem, it > can't alert you to more important things. >This is one of the major issues addressed (rather extensively) by MIL- STD-1472. It is free for the asking, though reasonably long (about 100 pages IIRC) ?-)
Reply by ●August 20, 20132013-08-20
I can dial up a modem and whistle a carrier that it will connect to. I was once told I'd make a good color corrector doing video film to tape conversions. Can't help you. Tim Wescott wrote:> Like a good percentage of human males, I'm partially color blind to green > and red. In my case, it's enough that I can't tell the difference > between a green or a red LED -- so a piece of equipment that depends on > the operator being able to see the color of a bi-color LED is totally > useless to me. > > Needless to say, this is irritating. > > Does anyone on the group know how many people are really, truly tone > deaf? I don't just mean unable to hear when they're playing out of tune, > but people who are unable to tell the difference between a "beep" and a > "boop" when it's coming out of a piece of electronic equipment? > > I'm thinking of communicating status via a beeper, and for obvious > reasons I don't want to do the same "bicolor LED" crap to someone, only > with sound. >
Reply by ●August 22, 20132013-08-22
Op Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:18:07 +0200 schreef John Larkin <jjlarkin@highnotlandthistechnologypart.com>:> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 07:53:45 -0700, RobertMacy <robert.a.macy@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:14:25 -0700, John Larkin >> <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>> ...snip... >>> I'm not tone deaf (my hearing is great, mechanically) but I don't like >>> music and I have a very hard time understanding accents. It's a >>> signal-processing thing. >> >> Good hearing? Play an instrument? Perhaps, you don't like music, only >> because its 'reproduction' is so poor. > > No, it mostly annoys me.That probably means you haven't found your personal taste yet. ;) -- Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com/mail/