|
Post by silverdragon on Aug 31, 2014 11:19:43 GMT
Thats the problem here with people like you and me TLW, We have driven "Competitively", we took it to the track, [cut] YOU took it to the track... I paid a pretty penny in velocity taxes. Which kind of explains why you still like doing it?... legally now of course, you have that blue light to play with..........
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 31, 2014 14:47:47 GMT
Hm. would a person with ADD do better or worse at that than a person without? I'm curious. Depends on their interest level with driving. If they have a fascination with all things transport, the pass rate is guaranteed. If they are still at "My liklle pony", forget it. With any sort of Autistic learning difficulty, its more getting them to want to focus, when they have an interest, they will self-focus, but if its something the just dont want to do, you may as well try to plat fog?... When they say "I dont want to do that", unless you have a solid argument back, you lost it there and then. Its best to practise you arguments beforehand as well, as they will pick holes in anything you say.... I was referring specifically to the hazard perception test - in finding ALL the hazards (and I suspect you would have to adjudicate which hazards identified were reasonable, so you didn't just have someone click every place a terrorist might possibly have planted a bomb)
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 31, 2014 15:04:35 GMT
YOU took it to the track... I paid a pretty penny in velocity taxes. Which kind of explains why you still like doing it?... legally now of course, you have that blue light to play with.......... I don't run blues on the rigs in my station. don't want to be mistaken for a cop.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 1, 2014 14:18:42 GMT
I forget you dont have blue on all emergency......
As for the hazard perception test and Autism, yes, the higher functioning autistic person, once they have been taught what to look for, will immediately look for all possible hazards, and repeat back the "rules" if asked... As in, Van or Truck at side of road, look under it, you may spot the feet of someone behind about to walk out on you, use Window reflections to see behind objects, where balls bounce likkle boys follow, and is that Dog on a lead.....
If taught properly, they would have marginally a higher strike rate on spotting or looking for ALL the possible hazards, they can concentrate a lot better when they want too. Dont take my word for it, get it put to the test?...
They dont rule out on the line of thought "That wont happen to me today", however rare an incident may be, like a van door blowing open in a sudden gust, they will look for plan for and rule it out as not necessary. If anyone looks like they have a back door open on a van, they will note it... Go back to that looking for a set of feet as seen under a van... If the feet are pointing towards the front of the vehicle, an Autistic Asperger type kid will remember and recall immediately once told that that may indicate they have the back doors open. Likelihood of doors swinging wide increases..... I remember this because on the advanced Hazard perception you take with Heavy Goods and Dangerous goods (ADR) this is one you are liable to be tested on... you are shown a photo and asked to identify "ALL" of the possible hazards, if you look closely, under that Van, you CAN see a pair of feet... pointing towards the front of the van... and if you are even more observant, at the side of the photo, there is a shop window with the reflection of that person with the doors open just barely visible....
One of the advanced photo's I was shown was of a normal street with side street, house with Hedges around the garden. The hazard you were invited to spot amongst the easy ones was about 10ft away from the road junction there is a Bicycle helmet facing the road junction, just visible over the top of the hedge, moving.... on the side street, towards the junction... Obviously there is a Kids head attached, so the hazard may be what?...
I suppose this begs the question how would ANY kid fare on a Hazard Perception test....
Proposition to answer the Myth that Adults are better Hazard spotters than kids.
Take two groups of Adults and Kids. Let them take the test without any preparation. Now give them the course of instruction.... Take the test again, with obviously different hazards to spot. Who has better scores, Before instruction, Adults or Kids, who makes the higher increase of score after instruction, Adult or Kid, and who now after instruction has the better score?...
Is the truth that Adults are better than kids to start with just a matter of the kids never got taught road safety this way?...
If the answer to that is Yes, isnt it about time someone took notice of our "Crazy" ideas?... As in teach Kids whats useful to them...?....
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 1, 2014 14:43:23 GMT
I was thinking more along the lines of whether a person with ADD would see some hazards and keep looking, while a person without would see a couple and think they were done.
lets see: kids head in a bicycle helmet. I would interpret that as better odds of stopping at the corner instead of just barrelling out without looking.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 1, 2014 14:55:12 GMT
I was thinking more along the lines of whether a person with ADD would see some hazards and keep looking, while a person without would see a couple and think they were done. lets see: kids head in a bicycle helmet. I would interpret that as better odds of stopping at the corner instead of just barrelling out without looking. "Potential" hazard, would they stop or not, is it worth keeping that in mind as you get closer.... And NEVER think you have seen everything, and can stop looking. I am minded of the time on a road near Preston Barracks, I think I have seen everything, and then, one of your USA SAR "Black Hawk" things floats over the top of me, turns round to face me, leaving me looking directly down the barrels of a suspected magic .50 calibre and some other tasty armament that look better from the "Safe" end, which I was not at..... and very mindful I was that I was not at the safe end of anything..... "I wasnt speeding, Honest................." Of course, he was landing at the heliport at the side of the road, its just when they point the unfriendly end of a black hawk at someone, they tend to forget "Sensible" In my mind it was a LOT closer than it probably was. But when the first time you see one in close-up is facing you whilst you are doing 30mph...........?........ I wish I had had a camera that day, or even a Dash-Cam video... Put THAT in a hazard perception test eh?....
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 1, 2014 15:03:22 GMT
I was thinking more along the lines of whether a person with ADD would see some hazards and keep looking, while a person without would see a couple and think they were done. lets see: kids head in a bicycle helmet. I would interpret that as better odds of stopping at the corner instead of just barrelling out without looking. "Potential" hazard, would they stop or not, is it worth keeping that in mind as you get closer.... And NEVER think you have seen everything, and can stop looking. I am minded of the time on a road near Preston Barracks, I think I have seen everything, and then, one of your USA SAR "Black Hawk" things floats over the top of me, turns round to face me, leaving me looking directly down the barrels of a suspected magic .50 calibre and some other tasty armament that look better from the "Safe" end, which I was not at..... and very mindful I was that I was not at the safe end of anything..... "I wasnt speeding, Honest................." Of course, he was landing at the heliport at the side of the road, its just when they point the unfriendly end of a black hawk at someone, they tend to forget "Sensible" In my mind it was a LOT closer than it probably was. But when the first time you see one in close-up is facing you whilst you are doing 30mph...........?........ I wish I had had a camera that day, or even a Dash-Cam video... Put THAT in a hazard perception test eh?.... blackhawks aren't so bad. the Apache was designed under the same mindset as the kill-o-zap gun. - they leave no question that you are on the dangerous end.
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Sept 2, 2014 16:26:46 GMT
OK -
That high-security fence?
The paper I tossed over it last night seemingly disappeared into the grass, so I literally got right up next to it to see where the paper had gone.
The lighting was far better this time, and so I saw that the fence is only about 7 or 8 feet tall and not 9 - 10 as I had earlier estimated.
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Sept 21, 2014 16:14:55 GMT
We'd have issues with showing game footage on TV, which may lead to licensing issues that Discovery and Beyond would rather not deal with. The only way around it (aside from a ridiculous amount of careful camera work & editing) would be to commission games for the episode, but that could get expensive and require a fair amount of lead time. Discovery & Beyond might get some of that money back by later making the games available for purchase, but there's no guarantee they'd earn it all back. My nephew is planning to go into game design/programming when he gets out of college, and at least one of his courses has involved actually creating computer games -- basic games, but games none the less. With the number of colleges in the SF area, what are the odds that a similar course is being taught? Talk to the professor, and ask if some of the students would be interested in producing a basic driving game as a class project. Then make sure the college/university is specifically thanked on-air. For legal reasons, they'd need to put the test kids in a simulator rather than a real car. But even the {probably not appropriate} simulators we had in my drivers' ed class had pedals and a steering wheel. A good simulator would probably be much closer to an actual driver's seat, and could be obtained the same way they get other high-tech gear -- in-episode promotion.
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Sept 22, 2014 17:03:12 GMT
Not really a kid-linked myth, but what about testing some of the "fix your CD/DVD" suggestions? There's a thread on the Snopes message boards about putting a scratched CD in the freezer to repair it, and while it's not technically a repair there's always the classic "green marker on the edge to improve sound".
The kids would be able to get hands-on with all the testing for this one. Either Beyond or Disco would have to get music rights, though it might be possible to run the tests with public-domain OTR -- I've got gigabytes of old radio MP3s, and it's a small collection.
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Sept 22, 2014 18:30:31 GMT
If someone knows how to play classical music, then perhaps the team could get them to do a few songs.
Especially if the person is another kid.
Classical music is IIRC largely public domain now, and so the only issues would be with that specific performance.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 22, 2014 20:20:37 GMT
Why not just use the theme music for the show? Copyright would hardly be an issue then - and they would not have the time to listen to long tracks anyway.
For DVD's they could simply get multiple copies of one of their earlier episodes - again, removing any copyright issues.
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Sept 23, 2014 14:39:33 GMT
One of the Snopes posters was wondering if burned vs commercial CD/DVD would make a difference ... but I'm certain they can get a commercial CD of the show's theme. It's slow at work, so I'm looking up some other fixes: * This one might take too long -- it's Windex, Vaseline, and toothpaste, with long wait times between each step. * Toothpaste and a banana. They say they got their best results combining these two items, but just in case ... * Here's a link for a toothpaste-only method. * Either furniture wax or creamy peanut butter (procedure's the same for both, which is why they're lumped together) * A 60-watt incandescent light bulb. It sounds like this one is a temporary fix (they specify playing the CD while it's still hot).
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Sept 27, 2014 16:11:08 GMT
I've had good results for small scratches with hair spray and a quick wipe afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 28, 2014 15:16:36 GMT
be sure to use a commercial CD repair kit for a control. (by commercial I mean one you find in the electronics section, rather than something a CD repair service might use)
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Sept 28, 2014 21:51:21 GMT
Actually, why not do both since folks would likely ask anyway?
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 29, 2014 2:22:28 GMT
Actually, why not do both since folks would likely ask anyway? I'm not sure such a thing as a CD buffer for commercial use exists - cheaper to just pay for a reprint of the CD.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 29, 2014 11:49:38 GMT
There ARE professional CD buffers, most DVD/video game rental/hire shops have at least one. So they are not hard to find - there are probably half a dozen within two or three miles of M5 and the owners would probably not be against a polite request to use their machines in this case.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 29, 2014 14:17:05 GMT
There ARE professional CD buffers, most DVD/video game rental/hire shops have at least one. So they are not hard to find - there are probably half a dozen within two or three miles of M5 and the owners would probably not be against a polite request to use their machines in this case. there we have it, then. two controls: the one for home use, and the professional grade one.
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Sept 30, 2014 18:55:14 GMT
The pro-grade buffer would probably have to be used by the owner. A rig to put uniform scratches on the disks would at least have to be built by J&A, I don't know (since I don't know what they'd be building) if the kids could use it or not. But the kids should be able to use the home-grade buffer and all the DIY repairs.
|
|