Blue Shield Of California Network Guide: Fill & Download for Free

Open enrollment can be an overwhelming experience for consumers! Depending on your location and the market you’re in, choosing a health insurance plan can involve up to three separate decisions:Which insurance companyWhich product lineWhich plan structureThe first two are often intertwined. For example, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida offers three product lines on the Exchange: a narrow-network PPO, a large-network PPO, and an HMO. The HMO is so different from the PPOs that I would treat them as offered by an entirely different company. (For example, in the HMO, authorizations and referrals are handled by your assigned medical group, not by Blue Cross directly, so it’s the responsiveness of the medical group that needs to be evaluated.)I would choose company and product line first. Here’s a few questions to consider:Networks. If there’s particular doctors or clinics that you want to use, are they in-network? What about the nearest trauma center or tertiary hospital? (Important if something catastrophic were to happen that smaller community hospitals are not equipped to handle. Car accidents, cancer, that sort of thing.) Are there sufficient specialists nearby?If you travel frequently, does the company have a national network or are you only covered for “emergencies” when you’re not at home?Access to care. I once enrolled in an HMO where the soonest non-urgent appointment with an orthopedic specialist was 4 months out. Not cool. (“Not urgent” meant that it could wait more than 72 hours, not that I wasn’t in pain.) Kaiser Permanente has been cited by the state of California multiple times because it makes access to mental health professionals very difficult. (There’s a waitlist to get on a waitlist for an appointment…)Treatment algorithms. Some HMOs are very aggressive about managing treatments in a specific way. If you are receiving a particular treatment that you want to continue under the new insurance, ask if there’s restrictions.If you are currently taking medications, check the formulary. Insurance companies only need to cover some drugs in every therapeutic class, not every drug. If there’s a particular drug that you are currently taking and would like to continue to take, check if it’s on the formulary and if it has restrictions (like “step therapy”, meaning you have to try 1–2 other drugs in the same therapeutic class first).Customer service. Do customers struggle to obtain pre-authorizations or resolve rejected claims? Is it easy to reach a qualified person on the phone, or do you spend 4 hours on the line to get connected to a call center in India that can only read you pre-phrased statements that are irrelevant to your problem?Once you know which company and product line you want, you will have to choose a plan structure. Lower deductibles or lower premiums? HSA-compatible? That’s partially a financial calculation and partially an exercise in risk aversion.Write out the claims you are likely to incur. (If your health hasn’t changed, use what you consumed in the last 12 months as a guide.) What would that cost you under the different plan structures? Which plan is the cheapest for premiums + costshare combined?Add a catastrophic event and repeat the exercise. (Say, a $20,000 5-day hospital stay.)If the same plan turns out to be best under both “expected use” and “bad event” scenarios, buying that one is a no-brainer. If not, you’ll have to decide how risk-averse you are.If you expect to be covered for less than 12 months (planning to change jobs, graduate from school, etc), take that into account when you do the math.If you buy a plan on the Exchange and you qualify for CSRs, I would urge you to give special consideration to the CSR plan (named Silver 73, Silver 87 or Silver 93). These offer lower cost-share amounts to you, paid for with other people’s money.

The answer is, it depends on your timeframe.If the war started a week from now and lasted a few months to a few years, the US would easily hold out with far less damage than many think. There’s even a good chance the US could collapse civilization in the rest of the world. Explanation below.But...the US would be unlikely to WIN such a war and so if the war lasted longer than a few years, eventually the world would defeat the US. Here's why...Very few countries are currently on par with us technologically. Specifically, three key technologies are needed to defeat the US - domination of space, domination of the air and domination of the seas.The world couldn't invade anytime in the near future because the US has overwhelming advantages in these areas AND has extremely favorable geography.To invade the US, you have to put boots on the ground. And this means you have to invade by Canada, Mexico, air or by sea.Air is a non-starter. You'd have to use all of the foreign airlift capacity of the world to get enough troops into theatre and they would need to be protected. No nation has the ability to project significant fighter aircraft anywhere near US territory. The World wouldn't be able to protect the troop transports so any airborne attack would be eliminated in its entirety with ease.Invading US territory directly by sea would be suicidal. US dominance of space would ensure the US could see any flotilla coming. China and Russia might take out some satellites, but the US (assuming a crash program to revitalize launch capability) would replace them just as quickly. And the US has a much more capable ASAT weapons. The world would quickly lose the ability to utilize space and that would leave them virtually blind, without GPS or surveillance capability. Heck, they wouldn’t even be able to predict the weather.The whole world combined does not have the force projection and amphibious assault capabilities of the US. The US Navy and Air Force would obliterate anything coming near the coasts by sea. Even if you commissioned every commercial vessel in the world and escorted them with every military vessel, they would be sailing towards the US blind. They would be sitting ducks for US airpower to pick off from standoff range. The US would maintain air and sea superiority easily for a thousand miles in every direction from North America. So that won't work.What about the US neighbors?Canada isn't going to put up much of a fight and invading Canada solves the US's fuel problems, cited by many as an issue. It also gives the US defense in depth and territory from which they can repulse any amphibious invasions from the North. The problem here is that the US then becomes an occupying force and would probably have to deal with a domestic insurgency. But since this is an existential fight, the US isn’t going to be nice and has a lot of experience with insurgencies. Every Canadian would be biometricaly scanned and implanted with tracking chips, like the ones you use on your pet, but with integrated GPS. Failure to have one would be punishable by death. Biometric ID will make it relatively easy to suppress the population. Anyone resisting would be killed or sent to the gulag in the Northern Territories. So Canada wont be much of a problem.Mexico isn’t going to threaten the US either. They don’t have the military capability. And the US has a huge advantage here because most of northern Mexico is open desert. Armor, artillery and air love open desert and the US has a whole lot of tanks, howitzers and planes. The US would likely invade northern Mexico in order to capture the Sabinas and Burgos gas fields, depopulate the border towns and establish a nice free fire buffer zone 200 miles inside Mexico. Anything that moved in the buffer zone would die. Even if every military-aged male in Central and South America massed for a human wave attack, the US would see it coming and decimate it with strategic bombing, mopping up any remaining forces with artillery and small arms fire. It would be a slaughter with little or no loss of life on the US side.Let’s assume the world was smart enough not to try the suicidal amphibious, air or human wave attacks. They’ve destroyed most US forces deployed at bases overseas, but those forces caused terrible damage in Germany, Japan, Italy and the UK before they were destroyed or captured. The World lost most of their satellite surveillance capability so they’ve got no strategic picture of what is happening. They heard that the US now owns Canada and has established a buffer inside Mexico. Russia tried to penetrate their airspace with long range bombers and surveillance aircraft, but US F-22s destroyed them before the pilots knew they were in danger.Meanwhile US B-52 bombers backed up by F-22, F-16, F-35 and F-15 fighters (remember the US has long-range tankers) are systematically eliminating all foreign military capabilities in the Western Hemisphere with swarms of smart bombs and cruise missiles. Ports, shipping, bases - all are systematically eliminated. B-1 and B-2 bombers are hitting high priority strategic targets in Europe and Asia.The US withdrew half its aircraft carrier battle groups to protect the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, and uses the other five groups and its attack submarines to systematically hunt down any Russian, British, Chinese, French, Indian, Korean or Japanese naval vessels remaining in the open ocean. Former US allies are extremely surprised when encrypted kill switched built into US-supplied equipment leave their Harpoon and Tomahawk weapons systems useless. World naval ships venturing into the Arctic, North Atlantic, Eastern Pacific, Caribbean or within three thousand miles of Hawaii vanish, never to be heard from again. The World’s remaining blue water naval ships retreat close to land where they can be protected by air power and surface to air missiles.US submarines launch flurries of cruise missiles at ports and airfields and disappear back beneath the surface. US B-1 and B-2 bombers conduct strategic strikes on critical targets worldwide using standoff cruise missiles and precision guided weapons. By targeting major infrastructure - dams, power-plants, oil refineries, pipelines, levies and major bridges the US could cause massive damage to the World’s ability to shift to an offensive posture. Within a week electricity would be out in much of the world. US submarines would sink tankers in the Panama Canal and Suez Canal, closing them permanently. The US would sow the Persian Gulf, Straights of Gibraltar and Straights of Malacca with air and sub deployed mines, wreaking havoc with shipping and cutting off vital choke points. The destruction of shipping and land infrastructure would prevent fuel and food from moving throughout the world.Russia, Europe, China, Japan, Australia and Korea would have the best shot at defending themselves, but the US can attack them indirectly. China, Korea and Japan import nearly all their oil. If US sea power cuts off oceanic oil and gas supplies, those nations die. Europe is vulnerable to attacks on gas pipelines, offshore oil platforms and nuclear reactors. Russia and Australia are the most self sufficient, but if East Asia and Europe aren’t providing them electronics, they’re soon back in the 1950’s. Also, US strikes on European nuclear plants would litter high gamma radiation across Europe and Russia, rendering huge regions uninhabitable. Colder climates would have a very, very frigid, hungry winter. Tens or hundreds of millions would die from exposure and famine.Targeting dams and levies alone would cause massive casualties. Most of Holland would be underwater. Breaching the Aswan Dam would wipe Cairo off the map and kill most Egyptians. Destruction of the Three Gorges Dam would cause massive devastation in China and millions of casualties. Rinse and repeat worldwide with catastrophic consequences. The world couldn’t respond because they simply couldn’t get close enough to the US to attack key infrastructure on a widespread scale. They might get in a lucky shot with a Backfire bomber or cruise missiles from an attack sub, but these would be isolated instances. The US could systematically pick the World’s infrastructure apart with precision guided weapons. The World has no symmetrical capacity to respond in kind.This is the closest the US could come to victory and they just might win. People shouldn’t underestimate the massive damage and disruption caused by the destruction of key infrastructure, collapse of world trade and shut-down of global shipping and air traffic. The US + Canada = fully self-sustaining economy. Not so in most other nations. Much of the world gets its food, raw materials and energy from other places. If that trade collapses along with the (satellite dependent) global telecom system, the World will have big problems.Most of the world simply can’t feed itself or satisfy raw materials needs with domestic supplies. There is the possibility that the world would never recover and the combination of social unrest, famine, disease and exposure would collapse World civilization into a pre-industrial state. If so, the US wins. By the time the World recovers 30-50 years later, the US will be generations ahead in technology and could dominate the globe with nano/bio-tech, autonomous drones and space-based weapons.So what can the World do? Airborne invasion is a non-starter. There isn’t a fraction of the ground capability necessary in South and Central America to invade the US. The World can’t cross the oceans to invade because they can’t see where US forces are and the US can see them coming and eliminate them with air and sea power. The World can only harass the fringes of US power but can’t penetrate the defensive shield.So they try ballistic missiles. Nukes aren’t allowed, but they can replace the warheads on all their ICBMs with high explosive warheads. Now you’re talking about 1000 plus warheads each with a 500-1500 lb conventional warhead on its tip. You can manufacture more. Seem impressive? It’s not.ICBMs are incredibly expensive as conventional weapons and just aren’t accurate enough to hit a specific target. Even the most accurate can only land 50% of their rounds within 200m of their target. So they’d really only be useful for saturation bombing against cities or military bases. And the US has Patriot and SAM missiles that can shoot down ballistic missiles. Some would get through, especially if launched in swarms, and you could cause some damage in the denser cities like New York or Boston with a few hundred ballistic missiles, but you couldn’t really have a strategic impact. Your best bet is to launch these weapons in the first hours of the war against military targets like B-2 air bases. You’d cause some damage, but probably wouldn’t have a strategic impact. The US could also retaliate in kind.But why bother when you have a 180 heavy strategic bombers? A B-2 can carry 16 2,000 lb precision guided cruise missies and the US has 20 of them. Add in a hundred B-52s carrying 20 missiles and 60 B-1s carrying 24 cruise missiles each and the US bomber force can deploy 3500 precision guided warheads per sortie. This doesn’t even consider the smaller cruise missiles that can be carried by ~2500 US fighters and attack aircraft. The US can obliterate everything that comes in range and conduct offensive operations across the entire globe. The rest of the world can’t.So the US would turn off electricity and fuel in a significant fraction of the world and maintain a nearly impenetrable perimeter. The World would get in the occasional lucky strike, but these would be few and far between. US strategic air power would erode World capacity slowly and surely.But even so, the longer the war went on, the more likely it would be that the US would lose. The US does not have the capability to invade the World. There just aren’t enough US citizens to occupy that much space and suppress 6 billion people. And the US can’t repeatedly conduct long-range fuel tanking and strategic bombing missions in the heart of Europe and Asia without significant attrition in hard to replace bombers. Russian and Chinese industry would retreat away from the vulnerable coasts to the interior. Southern and Central Asia, on the opposite end of the globe, would be very difficult to strike repeatedly. Surface naval operations in the Indian ocean would be extremely hazardous. Remaining industry would consolidate behind layers of air defenses.The World would recover. There would simply be too many targets for the US to attack. Electricity would be turned back on; oil would start flowing again. The advanced economies would share their high-technology with the rest of the world. The World’s combined industrial output would churn out hundreds of millions of soldiers, tens of thousands of tanks, planes, artillery pieces and most importantly, combat and transport ships.As these masses of weapons moved to the battlefield, US technological dominance would be overwhelmed by sheer numbers, and attrition would start to set in. The US would cease offensive operations and drop back to defending the North American perimeter, with the occasional strategic strike. World output would return to full capacity. Eventually, Chinese, Russian and European ASAT capability would erode US space dominance, leaving everyone equally blind. This would mark the tipping point.With satellite surveillance gone, the US would need to rely on vulnerable ground and air based radars to protect the land. World cruise missiles and long range fighters and bombers would harass and erode them. US carrier battle groups would have to patrol the world’s oceans with airborne active radar, looking for the inevitable amphibious invasion force. This will make them visible and vulnerable. Gradually the carriers will be sunk one by one.Commando forces will infiltrate Canada and Alaska through mini-submarines and RHIB-style boats that don’t show up on radar. They will harass US forces in Canada, destroy key infrastructure in the US, destroy transportation lines and generally erode US capability. The US wisely severed it’s networks from the Internet at the start of hostilities, but they can’t defend against cyber attacks originating from inside the US. Commandos will smuggle hackers through Canada where they infiltrate US networks and take down power grids, military command and control systems and communication networks.It would certainly take years, probably a decade or more, but eventually the World would have enough transport ships, combat vessels and aircraft carriers to begin the amphibious assault on the US. They wouldn’t come straight in. The Asians and Africans would use the southern oceans to transport troops, weapons and most importantly aircraft to South America, far away from the US’s remaining carriers and air power. These assets would be transported by land and short haul freighters northward for the upcoming invasion of the US.The US would recognize this threat, and would send its carriers, subs and surface vessels to interdict the transports. But the World would simply be able to churn out more aircraft and ships and they would gradually eliminate the US ability to project force at sea. The US Navy would cease to operate as a blue water force.The US would prepare for the inevitable. Already the most gun crazy population in the world back in 2014 (88 guns for every 100 people) it would ensure that every citizen is well armed and its 72 million military age males are all enlisted and trained for combat. The US would invade the rest of Mexico, pushing down to the neck of Central America, creating a choke point. It would invade the Caribbean Islands to prevent them from being used as air bases against the US. It would concentrate forces in a southern perimeter from Nicaragua to Puerto Rico.The World will concentrate forces in Venezuela and Colombia. Its massive advantage in aircraft will harass and erode US airpower, gradually allowing the World to hop its way up the Caribbean from the Windward Islands to Puerto Rico. Indigenous populations on Cuba and DR/Haiti would rebel, forcing the US to retreat from the Caribbean. Cuba would become a giant World airbase which they could use to support a successful armored push through Central America into Mexico.But the real vulnerability is to the North and North-West. While US forces are distracted fighting the battle in Central America, Russian, European and Chinese forces invade en masse across the Arctic, Bering Strait and Newfoundland. Alaska falls and World forces push to the southern end of the Hudson, only 500 miles from the lower 48. Canadians rage in rebellion and the Maple Leaf rises again.At the point the US would sue for peace. But that’s no fun for us, so the World tells them to get bent. Arctic World forces push south through multiple points in Canada, but are slowed by the long supply lines and difficult terrain. The Southern forces fare much better in Mexico. The US is forced to redeploy some of the troops from its southern border to the Canadian border to stem the Arctic advance. This lightens the burden on World Southern armies, and the US’s former advantage turns into a liability. World armor, now backed by near complete air superiority, rolls through the deserts of northern Mexico, decimating remaining US armor. The World invades the southern US, pushing west to re-take Arizona and Baja, north to the Grand southern Utah and Colorado and east to the Mississippi. Amphibious landings in southern Florida establish an eastern beachhead.With US resistance crumbling, World armor blitzes north across the Midwest plains, joining with forces in Canada and cutting the US in two. They push west to the Rockies and east to the Mid-Atlantic states. Florida falls. Hawaii is isolated and left to starve. Russian and Chinese forces steadily advance from the Northwest, taking the strategic port of Seattle, most of Washington State, Northern Idaho and Montana - joining with southern forces in the Dakotas. European forces enter New England. At this point, World airpower has access to the breadth and length of the lower 48 and organized resistance collapses quickly.But now the World has to deal with the remaining 200 million Americans who are heavily armed and really pissed off. Most of the World favors a simple genocide to cleanse the continent of Americans, but the Europeans talk them out of it. Pacification is what the US needs. A long thirty year occupation ensues with the World and American guerrilla forces inflicting terrible losses on each other. The urban coasts are easy to control and are relatively peaceful, as are the indefensible Midwest plains. But the Rocky Mountains and the wooded South are impossible to pacify. The Rockies are just too geographically complex to successfully occupy, and the South transforms into an ultra-violent hotbed of Christian religious extremism. West Virginia becomes the epicenter of religious fundamentalism in the world and the Redneck Brigades declare the greater Holy Confederate States of America from Mississippi to Western Maryland. Suicide bombings and roadside IEDs sap the morale of occupying forces.Over time, the World tires of the occupation and the losses in men and materials. Distraction sets in. Former enemies, untied by their hatred of the US, begin to bicker. China sees an opportunity to capture desperately needed resources and it seizes eastern Siberia. India attacks Pakistan and China intervenes to support its ally, sparking a nasty regional war throughout Asia. Japan, satisfied with annexing Hawaii and the other US Pacific possessions, starts picking fights with Korea and China. Australia and New Zealand get bored, and besides, surf’s up and America is so far away. The Middle East and Africa revert to form and fight amongst themselves. South and Central America just want to play futbol and the war has bankrupted them, so they withdraw their troops and restart the World Cup. Europe, Canada and Mexico are the only occupiers left.Mexico annexes Texas, the Southwest US and California and then calls it a war, steeping in self-satisfied irony. Most of the Midwest and Eastern US become part of Greater Canada. Cuba annexes southern Florida. The Rockies, still pissed off and well armed, cut a deal and become an autonomous region of Greater Canada. The Holy Confederate States of America, technically a part of Greater Canada but in reality still an unrecognized terrorist state, continues to be a festering, rebellious problemGenerations from now when southern insurgents periodically take up arms and confront the Canadian government - blowing up public healthcare clinics, killing hispanic people and urinating on federal buildings - elitist historians will comment about the inherently uncivilized and ungovernable nature of the wild Southern Americans, simultaneously admiring them for their belligerent warlike spirit and despising them for their regressive insistence on belief over reason and addictions to pale lager and fried fatty animal products.Southern Americans will brag to their children how the Holy Confederacy took on the world and kicked its ass, thanks be to baby jesus, the just and merciful.

Original question: “How did traffic signs colors and shapes become standardized?”In the United States, there is the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD), published by the Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration, that outlines all the rules for road signage and markings.You can download the MUTCD, for free, from the Federal Highway Administration’s website: 2009 Edition with Revisions No. 1 and 2 Incorporated, dated May 2012 (PDF). It will tell you more than you ever wanted to know about traffic signs and road markings.The automobile arrived on the scene in the early 1900s, making convenient travel available for many people. As more people took to the roads, traffic control devices were developed to keep travelers moving safely and efficiently to their destinations.The first traffic control devices were road signs. In the early days, folks out for a drive often ended up losing their way because directional signs were either nonexistent or broken or unreadable or knocked down.In 1899, horseless carriage owners in New York City met at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel for the purpose of forming an automobile club—the predecessor of the American Automobile Association. One of the goals of the new club was to place and maintain signs on local highways to guide drivers around New York City and surrounding areas.In 1905, the Buffalo Automobile Club installed an extensive signpost network throughout New York State.In 1909, the Automobile Club of California installed highway signs within a 250-mile radius of San Francisco. Sometimes these were actual signs, but other times they were merely colored bands around a utility pole.Auto clubs formed in other parts of the U.S. and started adding their own signs. Competition heated up as to which clubs would add signs to which routes. One study found that about half of the more traveled roads had as many as 11 different signage systems for one single route.While automobile clubs were busy putting up road signs, other groups were designing traffic control devices.The state of Michigan claims that a center line was first painted on a Michigan road in 1911. However, the California Department of Transportation claims that Dr. June McCarroll came up with the idea of painted lines. There is an historical marker at the corner of Indio Boulevard and Fargo Street in Indio, California that says, “… An encounter with a large truck on a narrow road in 1917 resulted in her Model T abandoning the road for a sandy ditch. This led Dr. June to the idea that a white stripe painted in the center of the road would make automobile travel safer. She personally painted the first known stripe in California on Indio Boulevard, then part of Highway 99, during 1917. A letter writing campaign initiated by the Indio Women’s Club eventually led to adoption of the practice by the California Highway Commission in 1924. …” See Dr. June Robertson McCarroll - Indio, CA - Signs of History on Waymarking.com.On August 5, 1914, the American Traffic Signal Company installed a traffic signal system at the intersection of East 105th Street and Euclid Avenue in Cleveland, Ohio.In 1915, the first stop sign was put up in Detroit, Michigan.On July 11, 1916, the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916 (also known as the Bankhead–Shackleford Act) required that a state have a highway department before it can get federal money. This was the first federal highway funding legislation in the U.S.In 1918, Wisconsin became the first state to install official route signs as part of its road maintenance duties.In 1920, the first four-way, three-color traffic light was created by police officer William Potts in Detroit, Michigan.Road signage was an unorganized mess. That led to representatives from Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Indiana working to develop uniform signs and road markings. In 1932, the group reported their results to the Mississippi Valley Association of Highway Departments (MVAHD). This was the beginning of standards for sign shapes.The MVAHD decided to creates signs of various shapes to show the danger level of situations the drivers would encounter. The more edges a sign had, the greater the danger. (Round had the highest number of edges.) The biggest danger to drivers were trains. Railroad crossings got round signs. The next biggest danger was intersections where it was decided that octagonal signs would be used to tell drivers to stop before they go through the intersection. Diamond-shaped signs warned driver of places that required caution. Directions or other regulatory information was put on rectangular signs.The signs were all white with black letters.Due to the physical limits of sign-making equipment, there was a maximum width of two feet for the signs. The round and octagon shapes produced the most waste, so they were chosen for the fewest installations. Signs weren’t lighted in those days, so they figured drivers, even if they couldn’t read the signs, would recognize the shapes and respond accordingly.In 1924, the first National Conference on Street and Highway Safety (NCSHS) proposed a color standard for traffic control devices:A red background with white letters meant stop.A yellow background with black letters meant caution.A green background with white letters meant proceed.A purple background with white letters meant there was an intersection.Black and white signs provided information on direction and distance. They were installed at every intersection and junction.Also in 1924, the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO)—the forerunner of American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO)—expanded on NCSHS’s efforts. AASHO felt that the yellow background with black letters offered superior visibility and advised its adoption for all danger and caution signs, including the stop sign. They thought red was too hard to see at night. They also proposed using the shield shape to designate U.S. highways.In 1927, AASHO issued the Manual and Specifications for the Manufacture, Display, and Erection of U.S. Standard Road Markers and Signs. The manual addressed the use and design of signage for rural roads.Due to the shortcomings of a rural-only manual, following a national survey of existing traffic control devices, the Manual on Street Traffic Signs, Signals, and Markings was published specifically to address urban traffic control devices. The urban manual was more-or-less the same as the rural manual, but had extra information covering traffic signals, pavement markings, and safety zones. Some notable differences were that smaller signs were allowed in urban areas and the stop sign was modified to allow red letters on a yellow background.While the two manuals were a good start, it quickly became apparent that having two separate manuals was confusing.In 1932, NCSHS and AASHO formed the first Joint Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (JCUTCD). In 1935, the first MUTCD was mimeographed for distribution. By 1937, demand for the manual was so great that an actual printed version was published. The 1937 printed MUTCD was 166 pages long and separated into four parts covering signs, markings, signals, and islands.It was the 1935 mimeographed version that outlined standard sign classifications: regulatory signs, warning signs, and guide signs. Regulatory signs had white backgrounds with black lettering—except for the stop sign: it had a yellow background with black lettering or a red background with yellow lettering. Diamond-shaped signs warned drivers to slow down. Square signs cautioned drivers about road conditions. Since nighttime lighting (street lights) was becoming more common, the manual also suggested adding symbols to the signs.The 1935 MUTCD was the first to include pavement markings. For example, center lines were required on paved surfaces wider than 40 feet, on approaches to hill crests with a clear view of less than 500 feet, curves with a restricted view, or short-radius curves. The center lines could be white, yellow, or black, depending on which color was easiest to see. The manual clarified the number, color, and meaning of traffic signals. The 3-color traffic signal was adopted as the standard.On November 7, 1935, the first edition of the MUTCD was approved as an American Standard.A scan of the 1935 MUTCD can be found here: https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1935MUTCD.pdfIn 1939, the JCUTCD issued a 25-page supplement to the 1935 edition that recommended changes for sign lighting, speed signs, no-passing zone pavement markings, pedestrian signals, and how to determine if signs are needed in the first place. Although sign lighting was recommended, white reflectors (red for stop signs) could be used to illuminate all signs.In 1942, a War Emergency Edition of the MUTCD described the types of traffic control devices to be used during wartime blackout conditions. Standards for traffic control devices were not changed for blackout conditions, per se, but when necessary, special blackout devices were to be used. The words we’re used to seeing on the pavement started out as a blackout device. The reflectorized beads we’re used to seeing in painted lines and words started out as a blackout device.A scan of the 1942 War Emergency Edition of the MUTCD can be found here: https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1942MUTCD.pdfAs the war wound down, it became apparent that the MUTCD needed to be rewritten. Work started on the peacetime edition in 1944 and was finalized and published in August 1948. The format of the manual was changed so that each traffic control device was addressed in only one place. Words were simplified where they could be and the squarish letters that were in common use were replaced by rounder letters.In 1954, a 15-page supplement to the 1948 MUTCD was published. It included 47 revisions, along with an explanation of each one. The biggest change was that stop signs were changed to a red background with white letters. Guide signs were added to the existing regulatory and warning signs. The new Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (Interstate highways) got signs with green backgrounds and white letters.In 1961, the MUTCD was changed again. It was now 333 pages long and it had two new sections: a section on road construction and maintenance, and a section on civil defense signage. It also included additional signage and markings for the Interstate highways. The 1961 MUTCD can be found here: Manual of Traffic Signs.In 1971, the MUTCD was rewritten again. It added definitions for “shall”, “should”, and “may” requirements. Signs with orange backgrounds were added for construction and maintenance signage. Yellow markings separated traffic going in opposite directions. More symbols were added. School signs were added. The 1971 MUTCD can be found here: Manual of Traffic SignsIn 1978, the MUTCD added highway/rail crossings and traffic control devices for bicycles.The MUTCD gets changed, added to, and/or fine-tuned as needed.The most current version of the MUTCD is the 2009 Edition with Revision Numbers 1 and 2 incorporated, dated May 2012. It can be found here: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/mutcd2009r1r2edition.pdfEdit, April 10, 2019: Regarding the more edges a sign had, the greater the danger: currently, pentagonal (five-sided) signs are used for school zones and triangular (three-sided) signs are used for yield.Currently, the following colors are used:Red is limited to stop, yield, and prohibition signs.A white background indicates a regulatory sign.A yellow background indicates a general warning message.A green background indicates permitted traffic movements or directional guidanceA fluorescent yellow/green background indicates pedestrian crossings and school zones.An orange background indicates warning and guidance in roadway work zones.A coral background indicates incident management signs.A blue background indicates road user services, tourist information, and evacuation routes.A brown background indicates guidance to sites of public recreation or cultural interest.