While I’m 110% supportive of LGBT+, I don’t think people painting crosswalks anyway they like is OK. They are safety features, recognizable from a distance, and it’s not far fetched to think that casualties may occur. Painting official building’s walls could be an alternative, for example. Both are technically vandalism, but these walls would not be a hazard.
And no, I’m not going to give you a private lecture on high contrast visibility. Do your research. You may start with why ALL operating systems go to the trouble of having a high contrast mode. (Hint: it’s not for looks)
Have you never actually seen a crosswalk before? Because I’m having trouble figuring out which part of these rainbow flag colored crosswalks makes them look any less like a crosswalk or makes them less visible or recognizable in any way. Literally the only other pavement marking that comes anywhere near looking like or being placed in the same way on a road is a stop bar. And guess what, car drivers routinely mistake the plain crosswalks for stop bars, thereby blocking the crosswalk. Making the claim that painting a pedestrian crosswalk in bright colors somehow makes them less visible or recognizable has got to be the dumbest argument I’ve heard this week.
You could have stopped at dumbest. I believe I’m making a civil and reasonable comment.
Also, a black and white contrast is objectively more un-equivocal than a flurry of colors. For example, my mother, in her 80’s is a surprisingly safe driver for her age, but her visual acuity is just not the same as before, and at night she may have trouble with a rainbow.
As someone who deals with UX and the psychology of recognizing and distinguishing things, I can tell you that you know jack shit about the situation here, and working in a field close to ergonomics is evidently not the expertise you think it is.
I did not say I work in a field close to ergonomics, I said that my work INVOLVES ergonomics. Also, pretending that someone who “deals with UX” has any serious knowledge of ergonomics, is like a chiropractic saying they are an actual medical doctor, or that a software “engineer” is anything near a real engineer.
Oh, BTW, you are using the concept of UX incorrectly. Not all system -> human interfaces are UX. I’m not completely ignorant on the subject. Several years teaching programming at the university level + many more developing for the private sector does give me a certain base to talk about the subject.
You come across as a “well ackchyually” dipshit. You might think you are making a point, but think this one through, is it a good one in this context? Is it even a good one at all?
I’m replying to many posts. The aggressive ones pretty much disqualify themselves. “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent” is very applicable here. People don’t seem to read.
the person speaking doesn’t get to decide how their tone is perceived. repeating “civil and reasonable” in the face of people who say you’re acting oppositely in some way is unlikely to change their opinion. even if it did, there is no way to phrase “painting a rainbow onto a sidewalk makes it less visible” in such a way that your tone makes up for the fact that the claim is absurd on its face. doubly so when you’re not providing traffic data to support the claim. also, ‘reasonable’ suggests you subscribe to some reasoning, but the ‘reasoning’ provided is “it’s not far fetched to think that casualties may occur.” okay well, color me skeptical. why do you believe that. i’ll give you civil for whatever you think that’s worth on its own though.
Have you read the comment? My reply does not allude to content, but to the insult. Part of my job is ergonomics. I’m stating a fact. That there has not been a casualty yet, does not invalidate my point.
you aren’t stating a fact, you’re speculating that colorful chalk on the crosswalk could contribute to an accident in some unspecified way. I’ve asked for what data could support your opinion (by way of observing its absence) and- you’ll correct me if i’m wrong here- you’ve just agreed that in almost the decade since the pulse shooting there have been exactly no incidents that can be traced back to this potentiallydangerous political statement that you 100% agree with. do i have this about right?
I have probably not explained myself well enough, or maybe you have not read, or understood correctly.
this potentially dangerous political statement that you 100% agree with
Here you clearly have a problem with reading comprehension.
Stating that something is safe because another event hasn’t happened yet, is a logical fallacy. It’s like stating that smoking isn’t harmful because your grampa smoked until his 80’s and didn’t die of cancer.
I assume the original memorial crosswalk had reflective paint used on its markings, if people are just using chalk or regular paint now it would end up reducing the reflective properties of crosswalks which would effect low light visibility. Im not sure if people have been doing this for other crosswalks but if that is the case the person you are responding to does actually have a bit of a point, we are better off just painting walls, steps, or making signs as they originally suggested, considering the state isnt just going to accept and standardize rainbow crosswalks under this administration. That also removes the hiding of motivation for the police from this being a safety act to being purely bigoted which is important. Don’t allow the fascists some reasonable cover to do what they do, force them to do it with their motivation on clear display.
The possibility that a random person would go to the lengths of adding micro-beads, or go to the trouble of procuring reflective pavement paint of the colors used seems a bit far-fetched to me. Could be, but unlikely in my view.
Yeah, like your point was reasonable, which is why i wanted to step in. I dont think that its tuning into reddit per say but I do think people are just getting extremely tired of this administrations rhetoric, which is completely understandable, but if we have any chance of fighting it we all need to be able to take a step back and view others with out the bickering or they win out easily and allow us to be fractured to easily. Plus your point of using other means for memorials or painting is better as it removes the administration’s ability to just act like this is being done for safety reasons and forces them to admit its out of bigotry. Eh I’m probably preaching to the choir by saying this to you. Hopefully we all can take the steps back when needed I know even I fall into the trap sometimes. Have a good day, though.
While I’m 110% supportive of LGBT+, I don’t think people painting crosswalks anyway they like is OK. They are safety features, recognizable from a distance, and it’s not far fetched to think that casualties may occur. Painting official building’s walls could be an alternative, for example. Both are technically vandalism, but these walls would not be a hazard.
Vertical faces of entrance steps? that’d be cool!
I’m sure they are very concerned about savety and that’s why they need to repaint them
Have I said that? I do despise the the motivation, but that does not detract from the cold facts.
Which are…? Surely you’re able to innumerate them with actual real life evidence
I think you may have wanted to write “enumerate”.
And no, I’m not going to give you a private lecture on high contrast visibility. Do your research. You may start with why ALL operating systems go to the trouble of having a high contrast mode. (Hint: it’s not for looks)
Oh fuck… Well I guess I’m toast.
Have you never actually seen a crosswalk before? Because I’m having trouble figuring out which part of these rainbow flag colored crosswalks makes them look any less like a crosswalk or makes them less visible or recognizable in any way. Literally the only other pavement marking that comes anywhere near looking like or being placed in the same way on a road is a stop bar. And guess what, car drivers routinely mistake the plain crosswalks for stop bars, thereby blocking the crosswalk. Making the claim that painting a pedestrian crosswalk in bright colors somehow makes them less visible or recognizable has got to be the dumbest argument I’ve heard this week.
You could have stopped at dumbest. I believe I’m making a civil and reasonable comment.
Also, a black and white contrast is objectively more un-equivocal than a flurry of colors. For example, my mother, in her 80’s is a surprisingly safe driver for her age, but her visual acuity is just not the same as before, and at night she may have trouble with a rainbow.
If you bothered to look at the way these are painted you would know this isn’t a problem.
As someone who deals with ergonomics as part of his job I KNOW there is a problem.
As someone who deals with UX and the psychology of recognizing and distinguishing things, I can tell you that you know jack shit about the situation here, and working in a field close to ergonomics is evidently not the expertise you think it is.
I did not say I work in a field close to ergonomics, I said that my work INVOLVES ergonomics. Also, pretending that someone who “deals with UX” has any serious knowledge of ergonomics, is like a chiropractic saying they are an actual medical doctor, or that a software “engineer” is anything near a real engineer.
The problem we’re talking about is a UX one. The ability to quickly distinguish a visual sign / interface.
And I’m both an actual electrical engineer and a software engineer, I understand the distinctions between the two very well.
But do please cite your ergonomic data showing that rainbow crosswalks are hard to see, or you can admit that you’re just baselessly pearl clutching.
Visibility of Targets. Werner Adrian. A classic and a reference on the subject.
Oh, BTW, you are using the concept of UX incorrectly. Not all system -> human interfaces are UX. I’m not completely ignorant on the subject. Several years teaching programming at the university level + many more developing for the private sector does give me a certain base to talk about the subject.
You come across as a “well ackchyually” dipshit. You might think you are making a point, but think this one through, is it a good one in this context? Is it even a good one at all?
I think you may have anger issues. If that is the case (I’m not trained to diagnose) you may want to explore professional attention.
I rest my case.
It’s funny how they’re only replying to comments with a somewhat “aggressive” tone, to complain about the tone while ignoring the actual point.
I’m replying to many posts. The aggressive ones pretty much disqualify themselves. “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent” is very applicable here. People don’t seem to read.
‘people disagreeing with me on the internet is violence’ -assic isamov
the person speaking doesn’t get to decide how their tone is perceived. repeating “civil and reasonable” in the face of people who say you’re acting oppositely in some way is unlikely to change their opinion. even if it did, there is no way to phrase “painting a rainbow onto a sidewalk makes it less visible” in such a way that your tone makes up for the fact that the claim is absurd on its face. doubly so when you’re not providing traffic data to support the claim. also, ‘reasonable’ suggests you subscribe to some reasoning, but the ‘reasoning’ provided is “it’s not far fetched to think that casualties may occur.” okay well, color me skeptical. why do you believe that. i’ll give you civil for whatever you think that’s worth on its own though.
Have you read the comment? My reply does not allude to content, but to the insult. Part of my job is ergonomics. I’m stating a fact. That there has not been a casualty yet, does not invalidate my point.
you aren’t stating a fact, you’re speculating that colorful chalk on the crosswalk could contribute to an accident in some unspecified way. I’ve asked for what data could support your opinion (by way of observing its absence) and- you’ll correct me if i’m wrong here- you’ve just agreed that in almost the decade since the pulse shooting there have been exactly no incidents that can be traced back to this potentially dangerous political statement that you 100% agree with. do i have this about right?
I have probably not explained myself well enough, or maybe you have not read, or understood correctly.
Here you clearly have a problem with reading comprehension.
Stating that something is safe because another event hasn’t happened yet, is a logical fallacy. It’s like stating that smoking isn’t harmful because your grampa smoked until his 80’s and didn’t die of cancer.
no, you have this backwards and i’m not taking time out of my day to explain how to you.
Well, that’s a relief!
I assume the original memorial crosswalk had reflective paint used on its markings, if people are just using chalk or regular paint now it would end up reducing the reflective properties of crosswalks which would effect low light visibility. Im not sure if people have been doing this for other crosswalks but if that is the case the person you are responding to does actually have a bit of a point, we are better off just painting walls, steps, or making signs as they originally suggested, considering the state isnt just going to accept and standardize rainbow crosswalks under this administration. That also removes the hiding of motivation for the police from this being a safety act to being purely bigoted which is important. Don’t allow the fascists some reasonable cover to do what they do, force them to do it with their motivation on clear display.
The possibility that a random person would go to the lengths of adding micro-beads, or go to the trouble of procuring reflective pavement paint of the colors used seems a bit far-fetched to me. Could be, but unlikely in my view.
Yeah, like your point was reasonable, which is why i wanted to step in. I dont think that its tuning into reddit per say but I do think people are just getting extremely tired of this administrations rhetoric, which is completely understandable, but if we have any chance of fighting it we all need to be able to take a step back and view others with out the bickering or they win out easily and allow us to be fractured to easily. Plus your point of using other means for memorials or painting is better as it removes the administration’s ability to just act like this is being done for safety reasons and forces them to admit its out of bigotry. Eh I’m probably preaching to the choir by saying this to you. Hopefully we all can take the steps back when needed I know even I fall into the trap sometimes. Have a good day, though.