[TheForge] OT - The science of driving.

[Andy Vida]

Bruce Freeman wrote:

> On the way to work this AM, I noticed how stupid some drivers seem. 

	Wait a minute... you've been driving since what, the civil
	war?  And you have only NOW just noticed how stupidly people
	drive?

> So here's a proposal:  Write a manual of the science of driving. 
> Include all topics from physics, etc., that would aid a driver
> understand why he should or should not behave in such and such
> a manner.  Make the science rigorous, but nonmathematical.  Give
> some numeric examples, where appropriate, but let it go at that. 
> The manual should be easy reading, along the lines of a Reader's
> Digest article (but longer).  A child should be able to understand
> it * 5th grade reading level.

	I see three possibilities here.  One, there would indeed be
	some people whose interest would prompt them to buy it, but
	don't expect to land on the best-seller list unless you can
	find a style of writing that somehow captures imaginations
	and/or hearts.  This is not out of the question.  Consider
	the pet rock and those hideous Chicken Soup For The <???>
	books.  Given the right approach, huge masses of consumers
	can be talked into buying just about anything.

	Second, by some stroke of luck some dickhead politician
	locks onto the idea like a lamprey and convinces one or
	more states that this should be mandatory reading for those
	wishing to acquire a license.  In this case, you would be
	widely read and eventually become quite wealthy.

	Third, no appreciable number of people would give a shyte
	about it and hopefully you have managed to extract sufficient
	satisfaction from the exercise alone to prevent you from
	knocking your own head into a brick wall several times in
	frustration, screaming to the universe "what in hell was I
	thinking?".
> 
> What I would envision is to put together a little booklet, comparable
> in size to a typical state's driver's manual.  Get the thing endorsed
> by the National Traffic Safety Council, and other relevant groups. 

	I see you're going for option #2.  IMO the smartest move in
	a sense.

> Get one or more states to agree at least to pass out the booklet,
> or, preferably, to add one or two questions to their drivers test
> that could be learned from the material in the booklet.  

	This is probably a very tall order.  We're talking about an
	affair that would involve a non-insignificant amount of
	TAXPAYER money.  That is always a serious issue and I would
	bet that these things are rarely, if ever, pushed unless
	there is something significant to gain by doing so.  It is
	a question of political capital and earnings on it.  Bruce
	Freeman, like most of us here, are political peons with
	nothing obvious to offer.  Unless you can come up with an
	angle that would make such a move politically attractive to
	prospective backers, I would say that you would be wasting
	your time in a grand way.  The issue of public safety is,
	AFAICS, never a consideration unless it can be politically
	capitalized upon.  That, it seems, is the fairly grim
	reality of these sorts of things.  Recall the old saw about
	the making of sausage and legislation.

> Find corporate or other sponsors to cover printing costs for a first
> (LARGE) run of copies.  Do a test distribution in one or more states.

	See above.  Besides, why on earth would you make this into
	a non-profit venture?  Please remember that the world does 
	NOT want to be saved and it will strike back at thee with 
	a grave vengeance if you try to.  If you're going to invest
	your time into such a thing, at least do so with an eye to
	a payoff.  This is politics, after all; a filthy, ratty
	affair no matter how you slice it.  If you succeed at this,
	it will be only because someone thought they could profit
	from it.  That said, there is nothing wrong with YOU profiting
	from it as well.  After all, you are laboring and while I
	can see many circumstances where I would, and in fact have,
	given my labor and time away for nothing, this would not be
	one of them.

	If you can find backers to promote this idea through some cynical
	political angle, then I would say that you should absolutely go
	for it.  This isn't to say that you buy into that angle, but that
	it could be a means of doing some little good.  The way into the
	world of politics (and make not the mistake of thinking that this
	is not part and parcel of what you endeavor to accomplish) is
	through filth and shyte, so if you cannot get used to that idea,
	you'd better get off the idea right now for your own peace of mind.
> 
> Topics I see as relevant:

	Your syllabus appears sound.

> Reactions?  Interest?

	If you want to do option #2, you'd better get your HAZMAT suit
	on and the 50 gallon drum of KY jelly ready because that's the
	reality of what you'd be getting into.  No free rides there.
	If you can stand it and manage to convince someone that they
	can advance their career by backing this idea, allowing you
	to reach your own end in the making, then I say go to it.  I
	think you'd be dumber than a post to do this as a selfless
	act.  Make a buck on it.  If it went nation-wide, which you
	can never know that it won't unless you try, the money
	potential to you as author would be large.  Don't let a
	misguided sense of do-goodery blind you to your own merits.
	It's not a one-or-the-other kind of thing.  You can have both,
	so why shouldn't you?

	If you go option #1, you will need to approach the topic in
	a way that will somehow grab the attention of the readers.
	What you're writing of is PHYSICS.  That, in and of itself, 
	is as interesting to John Q. Public as reading a treatise 
	on thermodynamics.  They will not touch it with a ten foot 
	pole because their minds are not geared up for such things 
	unless it be candy coated with liberal amounts of the 
	literary equivalent of big tits and rippling muscles.  
	Give it enough of these and you stand some chance in this 
	venue, and none without them.

	Practically speaking of success, I think option #2 is the way
	to go here.