4 ms·
Red/blue would be safer colors to differentiate for many colorblind people. Red/green colorblindness is so common it baffles me that comparisons using red/gree
by DigitalJack 12y ago
Red/blue would be safer colors to differentiate for many colorblind people. Red/green colorblindness is so common it baffles me that comparisons using red/green are still so prevalent. Especially considering how heavily biased the tech population is toward men.
And as Sanddancer points out, any colors that make use of red/green are going to be problems as well. (hence blue/purple being an issue as the difference is the red component).
In a given group of 5 men, you have a 50% chance that 1 is red/green color deficient.
- Swizec 12y ago> In a given group of 5 men, you have a 50% chance that 1 is red/green color deficient. Soooo, 1 in 10 men are red/green colour deficient?
- schrodinger 12y agoI believe that implies 1 in 8 people are. Pc = Probability that someone is colorblind (1 - Pc) = Probability they aren't colorblind (1 - Pc)^5 = Probability that no one in group of 5 is colorblind 1 - (1 - Pc)^5 = Probability that someone in group of 5 is colorblind Solve .5 = 1 - (1 - Pc^5): http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=.5+%3D+1+-+%281+-+p%29%5E5 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=.5+%3D+1+-+%281+-+p%29%... You get .129449, which is approximately 1 in 8
- schrodinger 12y agoAlthough wikipedia shows 7% of males, meaning a group of 5 would have a 30% chance of one of them being colorblind.
- Uhhrrr 12y agoI will let others dissect the different probabilities for at least 1 and for only 1 and say, yes! Nearly one in ten: http://www.colour-blindness.com/general/prevalence/ http://www.colour-blindness.com/general/prevalence/ It usually doesn't come up in conversation. Even when I was working on an image processing toolkit, it was several months before I realized my boss was red-green colorblind.