Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #13061 > unrolled thread

Tone Deafness

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded

Contents

  Tone Deafness Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-08-14 17:24 -0500
    Re: Tone Deafness Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> - 2013-08-14 15:43 -0700
      Re: Tone Deafness Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2013-08-14 17:18 -0800
      Re: Tone Deafness David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-15 08:53 +0200
      Re: Tone Deafness josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-08-15 08:48 +0000
      Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 10:17 +0100
      Re: Tone Deafness Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 12:09 +0100
        Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-15 10:47 -0700
        Re: Tone Deafness gof@somewhere.invalid (Adam Wysocki) - 2013-08-28 18:44 +0000
    Re: Tone Deafness Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu> - 2013-08-14 22:51 +0000
    Re: Tone Deafness Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.com> - 2013-08-14 23:53 +0100
    Re: Tone Deafness Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 00:05 +0100
    Re: Tone Deafness Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 00:13 +0100
      Re: Tone Deafness Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-15 05:46 +0000
      Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-14 23:31 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2013-08-14 16:14 -0700
      Re: Tone Deafness Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-08-14 18:58 -0500
        Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 09:22 +0100
      Re: Tone Deafness RobertMacy <robert.a.macy@gmail.com> - 2013-08-15 07:53 -0700
        Re: Tone Deafness John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> - 2013-08-15 08:18 -0700
          Re: Tone Deafness "Boudewijn Dijkstra" <sp4mtr4p.boudewijn@indes.com> - 2013-08-22 12:27 +0200
    Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-14 17:15 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-08-14 17:21 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 02:11 +0100
    Re: Tone Deafness Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-08-14 18:29 -0700
      Re: Tone Deafness "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-08-14 22:51 -0500
    Re: Tone Deafness Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> - 2013-08-14 21:34 -0500
      Re: Tone Deafness "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-08-14 23:07 -0500
        Re: Tone Deafness "P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com> - 2013-08-15 21:48 -0400
        Re: Tone Deafness gof@somewhere.invalid (Adam Wysocki) - 2013-08-28 18:42 +0000
          Re: Tone Deafness "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-08-28 16:38 -0500
      Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 09:24 +0100
        Re: Tone Deafness pippo2@disney.com (Jack) - 2013-08-15 10:48 +0200
          Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 10:24 +0100
            Re: Tone Deafness Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 14:00 +0100
    Re: Tone Deafness Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-14 22:25 -0500
    Re: Tone Deafness Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-15 05:42 +0000
      Re: Tone Deafness "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2013-08-15 10:23 -0400
    Re: Tone Deafness "Tom Del Rosso" <tomd_u1@verizon.net.invalid> - 2013-08-15 08:30 -0400
      Re: Tone Deafness nico@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) - 2013-08-15 19:07 +0000
        Re: Tone Deafness "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2013-08-15 15:40 -0400
          Re: Tone Deafness "Tom Del Rosso" <tomd_u1@verizon.net.invalid> - 2013-08-16 22:23 -0400
            Re: Tone Deafness "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2013-08-17 04:26 -0400
              Re: Tone Deafness josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-08-18 05:00 +0000
              Re: Tone Deafness gof@somewhere.invalid (Adam Wysocki) - 2013-08-28 18:48 +0000
      Re: Tone Deafness Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-08-15 15:48 -0700
        Re: Tone Deafness Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-08-15 19:55 -0400
          Re: Tone Deafness Stef <stef33d@yahooI-N-V-A-L-I-D.com.invalid> - 2013-08-16 09:30 +0200
          Re: Tone Deafness Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-08-16 13:47 -0700
        Re: Tone Deafness T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> - 2013-08-16 01:50 -0400
          Re: Tone Deafness Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-16 10:16 -0500
        Re: Tone Deafness Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2013-08-16 09:16 +0100
        Re: Tone Deafness gof@somewhere.invalid (Adam Wysocki) - 2013-08-28 18:50 +0000
          Re: Tone Deafness Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-08-28 19:44 -0700
            Re: Tone Deafness gof@somewhere.invalid (Adam Wysocki) - 2013-08-29 09:26 +0000
              Re: Tone Deafness Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-08-29 09:17 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness Ecnerwal <MyNameForward@ReplaceWithMyVices.Com.invalid> - 2013-08-15 12:05 -0400
      Re: Tone Deafness Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 17:29 +0100
        Re: Tone Deafness Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-08-15 18:00 +0100
        Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-15 11:16 -0700
          Re: Tone Deafness josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-08-16 02:56 +0000
            Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-15 21:47 -0700
              Re: Tone Deafness josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-08-17 16:36 +0000
                Re: Tone Deafness Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-08-17 11:49 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness NotReallyMe <nrm@vallidatedsoftware.com> - 2013-08-16 10:23 -0700
      Re: Tone Deafness Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-16 17:29 +0000
        Re: Tone Deafness "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2013-08-17 04:32 -0400
        Re: Tone Deafness "Boudewijn Dijkstra" <sp4mtr4p.boudewijn@indes.com> - 2013-08-22 13:10 +0200
    Re: Tone Deafness Jim Stewart <jstewart@jkmicro.com> - 2013-08-20 13:18 -0700
    Re: Tone Deafness bbhack <bbhack@gmail.com> - 2013-08-25 23:49 -0500
      Re: Tone Deafness bbhack <bbhack@gmail.com> - 2013-08-26 01:21 -0500
      Re: Tone Deafness Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-26 07:01 +0000
      Re: Tone Deafness josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-08-28 03:51 +0000

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

#13110

On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:30 -0700, Don Y wrote:

> Hi Martin,
> 
> On 8/15/2013 9:29 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> 
>> Also be careful how annoying you make the sound - aircraft cockpit
>> sounders have it about right to grab attention but not paralyse the
>> crew into inaction or worse still forcing them to look up how to
>> disable the wretched alarm so that they can hear themselves think.
> 
> The character of the sound can be changed to suit its intent. E.g., "you
> have a phone call" can be far less insistent than "the house is on
> fire".  "System operational" more subtle than "Oh, Crap!  Something's
> fried!".
> 
> I've designed products that played a gentle, unobtrusive little tune
> after POST as an indication that they were ready to operate and all
> diagnostics had passed successfully.  Yet, would "blow raspberries" if
> something had failed in the test.  People (users) can become accustomed
> to a pleasant little annunciator (and learn to *miss* it if they fail to
> hear it as expected).  And, similarly, *alarmed* when confronted with
> some discordant mess!
> 
> [Trick is making it *subtle* so it doesn't become annoying -- like *all*
> of the Windows sign-on "melodies"!]
> 
>> The latter was apparently the fate of the unfortunate Three Mile Island
>> operators who were faced with multiple failure alarms and klaxons going
>> off left right and centre. They were well aware they had big trouble
>> and didn't need to spend all that extra time consulting manuals and
>> fighting the instrumentation to get the alarm sounders cancelled.
> 
> Experimenting with "audio displays" (i.e., where you *want* to use audio
> as the primary communication medium), I've pretty much concluded that a
> "normal person" can handle three audio channels concurrently -- provided
> they have different types of content.
> 
> We're all used to dealing with "background noise".  Whether it is
> chatter of colleagues, guests at a party or background music, etc.
> 
> On top of this, we can *focus* (consciously!) on a specific audio
> interchange:  a conversation with another party, the sound from a TV
> program, etc.
> 
> Finally, we can tolerate *terse* (!) interruptions/annunciators that are
> *intended* to distract us (even if we would prefer NOT to be
> distracted).   A ringing doorbell/phone, a kid wanting to "go to Tommy's
> house", an item crashing to the floor, etc.
> 
> The "interruption" channel tries to "steal our focus" (i.e., become the
> "foreground channel" that we are actively engaged with).  If we accept
> this altered focus, we relegate the previous foreground/focus channel to
> another level of "background" where it may disappear in the noise, etc.
> 
> The problem seems to be when our attention is *tugged* in different
> directions simultaneously -- or nearly simultaneously.  E.g., the phone
> ringing coincident with a dish falling onto the floor.  At these times,
> background and foreground seem to fall from consideration as we try to
> sort out everything that is happening "at once".
> 
> Managing this "interruptions" channel is then the primary design issue. 
> I.e., if you've already signaled a *fire*, it's probably not wise to try
> to bother the listener with a notification that "the phone is ringing"! 
> (that will just be a distraction and lead to "overload")
> 
> Unfortunately, there don't seem to be many (any?) hard and fast rules
> regarding how frequent "events" can enter this channel. And, the ability
> of a user/listener to actively manage that event space seems to vary
> over time, activity, age, etc.
> 
> [I have a friend who can't pick black marbles out of a bag of mixed
> black and white marbles if you talk to him while he is performing this
> (mindless?) task!  Other folks can't tell you which relative direction
> an alarm was sounded while doing any sort of task that requires more
> than the slightest concentration.]
> 
> <shrug>

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.

Standards is just one of the things i do usefully well.

?-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13111

Hi Joseph,

On 8/15/2013 7:56 PM, josephkk wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:30 -0700, Don Y wrote:

[audio displays]

>> Managing this "interruptions" channel is then the primary design issue.
>> I.e., if you've already signaled a *fire*, it's probably not wise to try
>> to bother the listener with a notification that "the phone is ringing"!
>> (that will just be a distraction and lead to "overload")
>>
>> Unfortunately, there don't seem to be many (any?) hard and fast rules
>> regarding how frequent "events" can enter this channel. And, the ability
>> of a user/listener to actively manage that event space seems to vary
>> over time, activity, age, etc.
>>
>> [I have a friend who can't pick black marbles out of a bag of mixed
>> black and white marbles if you talk to him while he is performing this
>> (mindless?) task!  Other folks can't tell you which relative direction
>> an alarm was sounded while doing any sort of task that requires more
>> than the slightest concentration.]
>>
>> <shrug>
>
> 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...

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!)

> Standards is just one of the things i do usefully well.

I'll chase it down.  Thanks!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13128

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!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13129

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?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13116

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.

Scott

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13117

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.
>
>Scott

beep  beep  beep

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13127

Jan Panteltje wrote:
> 
> beep  beep  beep


   Or 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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13148

Op Fri, 16 Aug 2013 19:29:57 +0200 schreef Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com>:
> 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.
>
> beep  beep  beep

The White Walkers are coming!


-- 
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13138

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.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13191

On 08/14/2013 05:24 PM, 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.
>

Sorry for being so late to the thread. About 2 weeks ago, something 
happened to my right ear. I had been shooting earlier, but I was wearing 
plugs and shooting lighter guns, so i don't think that was it. I had 
been swimming a *very* little. Barely got my hair wet.

Anyway, tones in my right ear became frequency shifted, and they were 
louder than the right ear. Things sounded *weird*. This condition 
declined over about 4 days.

Had this condition been permanent, different tones of warning beepers 
would have been maybe a little useful at best. I have heard that 
cochlear implants produce weird tones.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13192

On 08/25/2013 11:49 PM, bbhack wrote:
> On 08/14/2013 05:24 PM, 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.
>>
>
> Sorry for being so late to the thread. About 2 weeks ago, something
> happened to my right ear. I had been shooting earlier, but I was wearing
> plugs and shooting lighter guns, so i don't think that was it. I had
> been swimming a *very* little. Barely got my hair wet.
>
> Anyway, tones in my right ear became frequency shifted, and they were
> louder than the
left
> ear. Things sounded *weird*. This condition
> declined over about 4 days.
>
> Had this condition been permanent, different tones of warning beepers
> would have been maybe a little useful at best. I have heard that
> cochlear implants produce weird tones.
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13193

On a sunny day (Sun, 25 Aug 2013 23:49:09 -0500) it happened bbhack
<bbhack@gmail.com> wrote in <a7BSt.277397$Dd5.202739@fx09.iad>:

>Anyway, tones in my right ear became frequency shifted, and they were 
>louder than the right ear.

Yes that IS a dillemma.
;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13206

On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 23:49:09 -0500, bbhack wrote:


> Sorry for being so late to the thread. About 2 weeks ago, something
> happened to my right ear. I had been shooting earlier, but I was wearing
> plugs and shooting lighter guns, so i don't think that was it. I had
> been swimming a *very* little. Barely got my hair wet.
> 
> Anyway, tones in my right ear became frequency shifted, and they were
> louder than the right ear. Things sounded *weird*. This condition
> declined over about 4 days.
> 
> Had this condition been permanent, different tones of warning beepers
> would have been maybe a little useful at best. I have heard that
> cochlear implants produce weird tones.
>

That sounds like a group cell death in the auditory ganglion and 
subsequent re-routing.  Rather uncommon but not unheard of (incidental 
pun acknowledged).  The nervous system is a marvelous thing.

?-)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded

csiph-web