[nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian signals

Dewey Bradley dewey.bradley at att.net
Sun May 30 13:56:40 UTC 2010


I have a friend who is very anti NFB.
He got a talking crosswalk put in, I ask him what the point in having it 
keep saying wait over and over until the light changes.
He started going on about makeing it so that everyone can use it, blind and 
every body.
I told him that it could hurt blind people because when that thing is 
talking, we can't hear if someone runns the light, witch they do all the 
time here, drivers are very disrespectful here.
He started calling me an NFB notcy again.
His gole in life is confirming all the negative stereotypes.
I don't know why blind people do that.
He knows how to cross the street.
But who knows what goes through people's minds.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Andrews" <dandrews at visi.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian signals


>  John:
>
> I read the link you gave below.  The majority of the piece is taken up 
> with research and descriptions of what an APS should sound like to be 
> audible to the most people.  There are a couple sentences, at the end, 
> which I will paste in that say that APS's improve the attention to walk 
> signals  for everybody, and the last sentence says that they help blind 
> people know exactly when the signal changes.  That is it.
>
> This is obviously an important issue to you -- it comes up again and again 
> and again.  The NFB position has shifted some over time, but at this point 
> we are not going out and fight for APS's at all intersections.  It just 
> isn't going to happen.  In the greater scheme of things we think there are 
> more critical issues.  I would guess you don't agree.  That doesn't make 
> us or you right or wrong,  it just is.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Effect of Speech Messages on all pedestrians
>
> Van Houten, Malenfant, Van Houten and Retting (1997) found that redundant 
> information conveyed by audible pedestrian signals increases the attention 
> of all pedestrians to turning traffic and may contribute to a reduction in 
> pedestrian-vehicular conflicts and crashes at signalized intersections. 
> Their research in Clearwater, Florida used prototype speech message 
> technology in which speech messages were broadcast from the pedestrian 
> signal head. When the pedestrian push button was pressed, the message was 
> "Please wait for WALK signal." The message "Look for turning vehicles 
> while crossing [street name]" began 200 msec before WALK signals were 
> illuminated.
>
> The signal also gave participants who were blind precise information about 
> the onset of the WALK interval and which street had the WALK interval.
>
>
>
> At 08:33 AM 5/26/2010, you wrote:
>>All you need to do is google "research audible walk signal".  There is 
>>plenty of information out that that will help you decide for yourself 
>>about audible walk signals. I'm confident that anyone reasonably informed 
>>on this subject will agree with me.
>>
>>Here's a really good place to start:
>>http://www.apsguide.org/appendix_c_signal.cfm
>>
>>Have you noticed that my posts are chuck full of links to documentation 
>>for the things I say whereas those of the people who disagree with me have 
>>none? This is always the case on this list in every single debate we've 
>>ever had. None of these debates are ever a case of dueling facts. In each 
>>ccase, I have all the facts and my opponents have nothing but 
>>unsubstantiated opinions and insults.
>
>                         David Andrews:  dandrews at visi.com
> Follow me on Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/dandrews920
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org 





More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list