News - Diary Of An ADI

The World Needs To Get A Grip

22/10/2013

This is a very old post! It’s attracted a few hits in May 2021. It was relevant at the time I wrote it eight years ago!

I remember a story from my childhood about The Emperor’s New Clothes. It was a Hans Christian Anderson story about two weavers who are commissioned to produce a new suit of clothes for the Emperor, telling him it is so grand that those of lesser status won’t be able to see it. The Emperor displays his new suit until a child in the crowd yells out that he is naked. Only then do all the sycophants in the crowd realise they have been duped.

Facebook is currently doing its best to behave like the two deceitful and irresponsible weavers in that story.

It has allowed beheading videos back on its site – yes, you are reading that right: videos of people having their heads cut off by savage, sub-humans who are lower than the lowest pig in the dirtiest pigsty. Facebook’s pathetic defence is that “users should be free to watch and condemn such videos.” However, they are “considering added warnings”. Isn’t that good of them?

Facebook is US-based. Barack Obama needs to realise what is going on here, and tear up a few of the more stupid pages in the American Constitution once and for all. Gun ownership is one, and the American interpretation of “free speech” is another. A bunch of zealots and religious nuts showing the murder of innocent people in graphic detail is not, in any shape or form, “free speech”. The only people who argue that it is are usually engaged in highly dubious activities themselves, which they are seeking to protect. Facebook, for its part, will gain many more visitors by allowing bloody mutilation to be shown, and especially by allowing it to be shown to children.

Lunatics from religious groups like those who would post such images should be hunted down and shot. Not given advertising space by Facebook.

When will people realise that they’ve been told by Facebook that they’ve effectively been given a new suit of clothes than are invisible to lesser minds? There’s no need to try and be clever about it (look at some of the Beeb site’s users’ comments – why do people who are stupid try to pretend they are not in public?) Facebook is no better than the two weavers in the Hans Christian Anderson story. And that’s all there is to it.

Facebook ought to be renamed “Facesbook” – because it appears to wear any number of them as it sees fit. My guess is that two is the preferred number.

Having allowed a video of a beheading to be shown with the pathetic excuse that people need to be allowed to make up their own minds, it has now taken the video down. According to this new article, Facebook changed its policy on showing graphic violence back in July, but:

…did not think the public would be interested to know.

It’s funny, isn’t it, how Facebook can be so dead set against censorship when it means losing visitors, but prepared to censor pretty significant policy decisions with weak excuses like this. Precisely what chimpanzee employees decided that the public “wouldn’t be interested” isn’t made clear – but I think the world and his dog will see straight through it and realise that the real reason was that Facebook knew damned well there would be a public outcry and that it would be better to conceal the decision.

Apparently, they have been tripping over each other to change the policy without exactly reversing it. And this time they’ve put it in a press release – which they should have done the first time. Even so, you can see the utter bollocks that comes from the mouths of companies like Facebook these days:

First, when we review content that is reported to us, we will take a more holistic look at the context surrounding a violent image or video, and will remove content that celebrates violence.

Second, we will consider whether the person posting the content is sharing it responsibly, such as accompanying the video or image with a warning and sharing it with an age-appropriate audience.

For anyone who doesn’t know, a “holistic look” simply means that they will have a meeting and come to a consensus opinion about any given complaint. And since the ones involved in arriving at consensus in those meetings will be the same idiots who are trying to defend the obvious moral problem with showing online murders in the first place, I wouldn’t hold your breaths. All those in the meetings will be New Age freaks who typify the staff at Facebook. Now doubt when consensus is reached they’ll all have a group hug, then go and talk to the trees and flowers.

What has the world come to when jackasses like Facebook can show videos of people being murdered – and defend it?

Increasing The Minimum Driving Age… Continued

16/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, DSA, News, Transport

I told you we hadn’t heard the last of this one. It’s going to run, and run… and then run some more. Especially with driving instructors like this opening their mouths.

In spite of almost every organisation welcoming the changes at least in part (though the AA’s spokesman and president is so far removed from reality his views are highly misleading), this driving instructor from Wigan is against it.

But Pat Caulwell, of Gidlow Motoring School, said the recommendations would be punishing the majority of young drivers because of the irresponsible actions of the few.

As I’ve pointed out many times, driving instructors are not usually the sweetest grapes on the bunch, and consequently Mr Caulwell appears incapable of understanding the concept of risk. Every single driver is a risk. Every single new driver is a bigger risk, and every single young new driver is a huge risk. The accident statistics prove it, and it’s why insurance premiums are higher for young new drivers.

Risk is a probability, not a certainty. If you look at something like a coin toss, where the probability (or risk) of a head or tail is 50:50, then this would equate to a young driver having the same risk of an accident as an experienced one. However, although they only make up 12% of the driving population, they account for 25% of all road deaths and serious accidents – just imagine how many they’d account for if they made up 50% of the driving population! If you compare that to a coin toss, you’re going to be coming up with tails a lot more than heads..

People like Caulwell need to get a grip and face up to the reality that young drivers are a huge risk. Even if the majority manage not to have accidents, they still could. A significant minority do – and since we’re talking about fatalities here, there is much more at stake than a paltry 5 minutes of fame in an obscure rag for someone who doesn’t understand what he’s talking about.

One in five young drivers have an accident of some sort within the first six months of passing their test. Carrying three passengers triples the underlying accident risk. With these fact staring you in the face, airtime should not given to people like Caulwell, who clearly haven’t got a clue. And to hell with namby-pamby nonsense like “working shifts” and “looking for a job”. No one should be allowed to endanger someone else’s life just so they can “work shifts”. When I was younger, I went through several periods of not being able to run a car, but I still got to work whenever I needed to.

A licence is a privilege, not a right. A car is a luxury, not a necessity.

Increasing The Minimum Driving Age: Update

13/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Driving Tests, DSA, News

The Daily Express is going all Daily Mail with this misinformed scaremongering session. It says:

A mandatory requirement for 120 hours of lessons could leave learner drivers footing a bill for £3,360 of lessons before even taking a test.

Some amateur hack with a calculator must have worked that one out. Shame they didn’t have a clue in the first place.

To start with, the number the hack came up with is based on an hourly lesson rate of £28 – and that’s in spite of someone in the article being quoted as saying average hourly rates are £18 (which would add up to £2,160). If instructors are charging £28 an hour in some areas, that’s what the market will stand, and it has no bearing on the rate charged in depressed areas because people there will not be paying £28.

Secondly, the proposals do not say that the entire 120 hours has to be with a driving instructor. Most learners have access to a car for private practice – many who never actually do any private practice still have access to a car if their parents would insure them. If the system changes, then so will the parents have to.

And finally, it will cost more in order to stop people killing themselves – no matter how that is achieved. Is that really as much of a bad thing as the Express and those it is quoting are making out? These lowlife hacks spend their lives whingeing about road deaths, and then oppose any plan to try and change it with rubbish stories like this one.

Idiotic “Research” Involving Alzheimer’s And Driving

13/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, News, World

It’s an unfortunate fact that there are many idiots in this world. This story appears to identify another group of them, located in Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, if this story is anything to go by.

These jokers have concluded that people with “mild forms” of Alzheimer’s can still drive safely. That’s in spite of the statement:

Although road test studies have shown a clear decline in average driving ability with increasing severity of dementia.

It’s like saying that jumping off a cliff is safe, because it’s only the bit where you hit the ground that’s dangerous! But they go even further by only making the comparison against other older drivers without Alzheimer’s – and I can’t think of an analogy convoluted enough to describe that.

Alzheimer’s is progressive. And it affects every one who gets it differently. But even in the early stages the possible symptoms are:

forget about recent conversations or events

repeat themselves

become slower at grasping new ideas

lose the thread of what is being said

sometimes become confused

show poor judgement, or find it harder to make decisions

lose interest in other people or activities

develop a readiness to blame others for taking mislaid items

become unwilling to try out new things or adapt to change.

That’s from the Alzheimer’s Society. And it should be pretty clear that someone who is likely to be slow on the uptake, to become confused or show poor judgement, to make bad decisions, and to become crotchety is not really a prime example of good driver material. Alzheimer’s typically goes from these early stages to the last stages over a period of about 10 years, but it can be much quicker for some people. People in the last stages end up requiring total nursing care.

Older drivers whose health or eyesight is already deteriorating for whatever reason are notoriously unreliable at recognising or admitting to the fact. Those with Alzheimer’s will be at least as unreliable – if not more so – at deciding to admit they should give up driving. So it is quite unbelievable that these “researchers” should come out with something like this – something which cannot possibly make the overall situation on the roads any better, since we’re talking about a negative progression. Alzheimer’s never progresses in a positive direction.

Altruism has no place in deciding whether people with such illnesses should retain their driving licences.

As many recent stories have shown, older drivers are totally safe – right up until one of them gets on to the wrong carriageway of a motorway or other major road (how on earth does someone manage that?) And I for one don’t like the idea of playing Russian Roulette every time I go out.

The “research” is irresponsible and misleading.

People with Alzheimer’s deserve care and respect – but not a driving licence.

American Roundabouts

13/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, News, Transport, World

Almost two years ago, I wrote about North-American Roundabouts, and how they were becoming more popular to the extent that websites about them were appearing. Even back then, some American states were whingeing that they were a “European import” and that they increased accidents. The Americans appear to be even worse than the Brits when it comes to grabbing the wrong end of the snake.

Just because people are stupid doesn’t mean that it is wrong to expect them to do things – even new things – that are better and safer for everyone overall. And using roundabouts is a good example, since they’re are designed to improve traffic flow in congested areas. But how do you prove that they actually work to people – in this case, an entire nation – who are frightened of them?

Whenever I’m doing the first roundabouts lesson with a pupil I always explain how and why roundabouts keep traffic flowing, whereas simple crossroads (light-controlled or otherwise) don’t. I just explain logically – and it’s enough – but given the Americans’ preference for rigid and inflexible rules (that was the Wall Street Journal’s conclusion in that previous article), more proof is obviously needed for them.

There’s a TV show called Mythbusters (if you search this site you’ll find several stories involving it). They go into detail in proving or disproving common beliefs about everyday things – anything from things which happen in action movies to normal things like traffic accidents. According to this recent news story they have put roundabouts to the test under the premise that they are either “a curse or cure for congested intersections” (in the words of the news item I’ve linked to). The story is brand new, so I would imagine it’ll be a little while before we see the show over here.

Apparently, they have compared a “4-stop intersection” (so, more or less equivalent to a light-controlled junction in UK-speak) with a roundabout. The found that the light-controlled junction averaged 385 vehicles over a 15-minute period compared to 460 vehicles for the roundabout over a similar period. Or in other words, the roundabout allowed 20% more traffic through. The news article, in The Detroit News, concludes:

There are a lot of drivers out there who fear and loathe roundabouts, mainly because they don’t understand them…

…Roundabouts eliminate T-bone and front end crashes. Any crash that does occur is minor because speeds inside roundabouts are usually limited to 25 mph and both vehicles are traveling in the same direction.

The story finishes by referring to how many roundabouts there are in certain cities – they count them in the low tens – and advises that more are coming.

So, roundabouts do improve traffic flow. Someone from America should come over and explain that to the idiots responsible for the “improvements” to Nottingham’s Ring Road, and the Tramicide in Clifton. They’re taking roundabouts out and replacing them with… yep, you guessed it. Traffic lights.

Nottingham City Council is committed to making life as hard as possible for the motorist, while simultaneously introducing absolutely anything that the spotty faced interns from the year’s graduate intake thinks might benefit pedestrians. I note from the Aspley Lane work that although the road is down to one lane (with huge tailbacks) this weekend, they’ve done the important stuff already and installed tactile paving for the dozens of crossings that the junction will now include (it had one before), and that’s even before they’ve built the pavements! And it’s all for the school 200 metres down the road, and for the nearby zoo (sorry, I mean the Broxtowe Estate), not for the tens of thousands of motorists who travel along the Ring Road each day on important business.

You can watch the Mythbusters segment here.

Life Out There?

13/10/2013

DOAADI

Astronomy, General, News

I love these kinds of stories. Every time a new lump of extra-terrestrial rock is found they start going on about how it might hold life. Or might once have held life. Or might one day hold life.

This time they have made up an even better story. The rock in question, they tell us, was blasted off a planet when its star exploded. Somehow or other – in the minds of these astronomers – this automatically brings up the possibility of life having existed on it at some point past, present, or future. Even though no life has ever been found in order to give such a conclusion any plausibility.

I’ve come to the conclusion there are two types of astronomer. The first kind discovers new things. The second kind makes up stories about new things.

If you ever watch some of those silly “documentaries” on the Discovery Channel – the ones that insist on trying to make astronomy glamorous – you see repeated low-quality animations of what life “may look like”, even though there is no chance of us ever finding out, and only a slightly better chance of there being any life out there at all (and by “slightly better” I mean the astronomers’ premise that life must exist out there somewhere and since you can’t prove it doesn’t, then you’re left with the “fact” that is does.

And they criticise those who blindly believe in any sort of god.

Bulgarian Driving Test Fraud

11/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, News, World

This is a story from Bulgaria, about Bulgaria, before the George Flag wavers get all excited. Apparently, from 2014 all Theory Tests in Bulgaria will have to be completed using tablets (that’s “tablets” like the one shown on the left for any British ADIs looking in, and not the kind you take for incontinence).

This change is coming about due to the discovery that the existing pen and paper test is prone to corruption, and that the entire staff of the Road Administration Agency in Sofia had been found guilty of manipulating test results. Even to the point of opening sealed envelopes and substituting the correct answer sheets. And 80 private driving schools were also involved in the fraud. No one knows how long it had been going on, or how many people had gained licences based on fraudulent results. Nor does anyone know who made how much out of the fraud.

I guess we’ll never know, but I wonder if Bulgaria is suffering the same wave of whingeing that we had over here when the DSA decide to move away from laminated pictures of a few road signs and start using those new-fangled computers? Or like that when they introduced the Hazard Perception Test?

Increasing The Learning Age – Update

11/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Driving Tests, DSA, News, Transport

Another hot story is the one about raising the age at which people can take their tests to 18. As I mentioned in this article, there are plans to introduce a graded licence system and to introduce various restrictions on new drivers. So it is a little surprising to hear what the AA president, Edmund King, has to say after casting doubt on the plan:

What we’d like to see is to teach people to drive more carefully before they pass their test.

I think Mr King is about as far above the actual process of teaching “people to drive” as it’s possible to get. In other words, totally out of touch with reality. No one down at the sharp end with an ounce of intelligence would believe it were that simple. It’s wishy-washy nonsense.

The fact – and it IS a fact, Mr King – is that new drivers have already been taught how to drive properly. They’ve already been taught how to drive carefully. The fact that they do not is down to their experience, maturity, and upbringing. It is impossible to reconcile the first two without the passage of time. Experience takes time to develop, as does maturity.

The most mature 17-year old in the world could still be involved in an accident because of inexperience. And the most experienced 17-year old (if such existed) could still have an accident as a result of immaturity. It is a basic Law of Nature. It has held true since the first written records of human history, and it has persisted until the present.

And still you get people who think that a few namby-pamby words can make it all all right.

New drivers need to be kept out of certain high-risk situations until they have developed experience and maturity. It’s not as if these new proposals want to wrap them in cotton wool or anything – the aim is just to keep cars full of immature prats off the roads, especially at night, in the face of overwhelming evidence to support it.

Driving Tests Only In English (And Welsh)

11/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Driving Tests, DSA, News, Training

That previous (well, previous to the previous) story about tests only being carried out in English from next year is hot news at the moment. A follow up story from the Beeb tells how Allyson Ng cheated on tests she was acting as interpreter for by giving the answers to pupils. The licences of 94 people were revoked as a result. Her operation was mainly based in Cardiff, with a small number in Birmingham.

Ng was charging people £110 a time for her “services”. DSA staff became suspicious when there was a sudden upturn in those using her.

She was jailed for 12 months for fraud.

However, this story illustrates one big reason why it is important that foreign language tests are eliminated as soon as possible.

A Rise In The Minimum Age For The Driving Test?

11/10/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Driving Tests, DSA, News, Training

I’ll believe it when I see it – but since they have (so far) decided to stop non-English tests, anything is possible. This BBC story reports that teenagers could have to wait “a year longer” before being able to take their driving tests.

Much of it is a rehash of what has been said before. However, it is worth taking a look at the TRL paper it’s based on, because that is quite new and it outlines all the proposals to be considered. I just wish they’d talk in English instead of convoluted gov-speak. Attempting to sift out the important bits, we have:

graduated driving licence
minimum learning period
mandatory daytime and night time lessons
mandatory training log book
12-month probationary licence on passing the test at age 18+
mandatory P plates during probationary period
night time 10pm-5pm curfew unless accompanied by someone 30+ years old
ban on carrying passengers under age 30
lower alcohol limit
ban on use of mobile phones (including hands-free)

Let’s hope they get off their arses and do something before we all die of old age!

Category - News