Arguably, anything beyond the things required for daily living is a luxury. Plenty of people do not have computers or TV's. I personally have found a greater appreciation for movies and television shows when they are described, and it is exceedingly frustrating when one cannot watch a foreign film or dialogue-poor show. The level of audio description in the UK versus what is available in the U.S. is astounding -- in fact, the bulk of the audio description is done in Great Britain. I remember not going to action movies with peers when I was younger, or not being invited, because no one wanted to describe them to me. I remember people becoming annoyed when my mother quietly described what was going on in a movie. Even important information on news broadcasts is flashed across screens. If it is possible to accommodate the print-disabled and visually impaired in one country, it is possible in another. We should not have to pick and choose among "luxuries" -- Shopping for appliances is another nightmare; I am tired of having to get someone to go over touch screens and controls with me so that I can memorize, mark controls, or make charts so that I can use something for which I paid full price. Even companies which advertise that they have "accessible manuals" either do not actually provide them or only provide them in shorter, slimmed-down versions. If something is accessible to people who want it and can afford it, it should be accessible to all. Not only is their a fairness component, but a social component: culturally, experientially, we are better integrated into the social fabric of our societies when we have independent, real-world access to the things our peers take for granted. Christine show On Apr 28, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Eugenia Firth wrote:
> Hi guys. > I love audio description as much as any blind person could. Before you > couldn't get them, I bought several movies on those tapes, movies I wanted to > watch again. However, and maybe I'm showing my age here, but I consider audio > description to be a luxury for us. I watched movies and TV just fine before > we got it. > > Computer accessibility, however, including the Internet's accessibility, has > become an increasingly frustrating necessity. I don't have statistics to back > up my opinion, but I think we delude ourselves if we think we are a > money-making proposition. Poor Apple has been braver than everybody else by > jumping into the quicksand of accessibility. If the good folks in Cupertino > are sorry they they made the plunge, they are being smart enough to be quiet > about it. I think they will be better off than everyone else in that regard > eventually, especially when the feds get involved in evaluating accessibility > the education arena. At least Apple will have no trouble, unlike others, > proving that the iPad, etc. is accessible to blind and other disabled > students. > > A blind friend of mine was asking me about these new vending machines that > touch screens. He was asking if there was an iPhone app to control those > things because he's concerned that he won't even able to get a cold drink > without extra help otherwise. As it is, at least at his work, he can count > the buttons. I have another blind friend whose electric oven went out, and > she a terrible time finding an accessible one. My microwave is still > partially inaccessible since my husband has yet to put labels onto that > mostly flat screen. When I go to Louisville this summer, I can just about > guarantee that I can't independently watch TV, unless you guys can tell me of > an iPhone app that will for sure work with the hotel's TV. > > I could go on and on giving examples. Without getting political, both > blindness organizations have written resolutions for positive and/or > negative motivators for some of these folks that are busy making our lives > more and ore inaccessible. We lost the battle of the accessibility of curbing > in our U.S. cities for blind folks, making our mobility more difficult. We > can't afford to lose the computer accessibility thing. > > Regards, > Gigi > > Eugenia Firth > gigifi...@sbcglobal.net > > > > On Apr 28, 2012, at 11:44 AM, Lewis Alexander wrote: > >> not getting it just yet, figuring out finances, etc so should have it end of >> may. snowed under at the mo with a machine restoration. a vintage industrial >> machine I'm completely rebuilding ready for use. so today's been spray work >> and drying. tomorow's the same. >> >> then after that it's assembly work. >> >> lew >> >> On 28 Apr 2012, at 13:50, Donna Goodin wrote: >> >>> Hi Lew, >>> >>> congrats on your iPad. they really are cool devices. My husband has one, >>> and I thought long and hard about getting one too. But eventually I decided >>> that since I didn't need the larger screen, that the iPhone could do >>> everything I needed, so it didn't make sense to duplicate devices. I >>> confess, though, I'm envious. Every once in a while I look at my husband's >>> iPad and get a sudden craving for coolaide. lol >>> Cheers, >>> Donna >>> On Apr 28, 2012, at 8:44 AM, Lewis Alexander wrote: >>> >>>> nice one donna, I fully agree. >>>> >>>> the iPad is a product which can truly change the lives of blind users >>>> throughout the world. I'm in the process of buying an iPad as it's needed >>>> for work both in the workshop and on site as a rep for a company, so the >>>> online catalogue needs to be available and accessible to me all the time, >>>> the iPad for me feels absolutely amazing, after road testing the new >>>> model, I've fallen in love with it. I don't need a wife, just an iPad lol >>>> >>>> lew >>>> >>>> On 28 Apr 2012, at 13:39, Donna Goodin wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Christine, >>>>> >>>>> I'm perplexed. How do you see the push to have iPads in classrooms as >>>>> something that leaves the blind/VI student out? If anything, I see that >>>>> as something that better enables us to participate, thanks to the fact >>>>> that Apple has made the iPad a fully accessible device. >>>>> Best, >>>>> Donna >>>>> On Apr 28, 2012, at 8:36 AM, Christine Grassman wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> With all due respect, Scott, laws which disparately impact certain >>>>>> groups or classes of people have been flouted through civil disobedience >>>>>> since the introduction of legal systems, e.g., civil rights, disability >>>>>> rights, employment rights, etc. The United States might not exist were >>>>>> it not for disobeying laws. >>>>>> I am an attorney, and it continues to amaze me how slowly the U.S. is >>>>>> moving to accommodate disability, and how snail-paced the societal shift >>>>>> in attitudes toward us has been. and it seems that whenever a company >>>>>> like Apple makes great strides in accommodating blindness off the shelf, >>>>>> plenty of other technologies come along and do not bother to incorporate >>>>>> us into their equation. So many educational apps, for example, are not >>>>>> accessible, though they could be, and given the push now to have iPads >>>>>> in classrooms, once again blind, visually impaired, and otherwise >>>>>> print-disabled students will be left out. Apple moves us two steps >>>>>> forward, and "progress" (for others) moves us three steps back. I should >>>>>> be able to turn on a television, flip a switch, or turn on a >>>>>> transmitter, and get descriptions. I should be able to access books on >>>>>> the Nook or the Kindle, not just iBooks. I cannot express, and I am sure >>>>>> others here agree, the happiness I feel when a new release or >>>>>> best-selling publication is available on iBooks. >>>>>> (Incidentally, if a book is available on iBooks and on bookshare.org, I >>>>>> purchase the book. Yet, I have lost quite a lot of money as a published >>>>>> author -- as soon as my book was published, I sent a copy to >>>>>> bookshare.org; it was more important to me to have it available at the >>>>>> same time to the blind and print-disabled. The Authors Guild apparently >>>>>> does not care about such access, despite the fact that they would >>>>>> actually get money from us.) >>>>>> >>>>>> I would happily go to the movies more and happily purchase >>>>>> audio-described movies through iTunes if they were available. Even >>>>>> movies which are released with audio description are not always sold >>>>>> through movie resellers -- goodness knows I have tried. To date, I have >>>>>> only located The Incredible Hulk, from 2008, which I purchased for my >>>>>> son. >>>>>> Even Apple could do more. It could strengthen its requirements for apps. >>>>>> It has provided developers with the means to make their apps VoiceOver >>>>>> accessible, and there are plenty of apps out there which could be so. >>>>>> Only apps that are visual by their very nature should be exempted. But, >>>>>> as usual, profit trumps people, despite the fact that the disabled >>>>>> community rewards those who remember us with our business. >>>>>> Frankly, I would prefer to purchase the audio-described movies and shows >>>>>> I download from the vault, so that I could watch them with sighted >>>>>> friends and family. I wish I could show a film to a class and not have >>>>>> to ask my para or a student to tell me what is going on. The >>>>>> entertainment industry gets plenty of my money. If they want more, they >>>>>> should remember that I deserve to be able to access their material >>>>>> independently. OK. Topic over. Those of you who wish to continue this >>>>>> off-list are welcome; I've appreciated your correspondence thus far. >>>>>> Christine >>>>>> On Apr 28, 2012, at 6:13 AM, Scott Howell wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I am sure commenting on this only adds fuel to the fire, but I did want >>>>>>> to point out that as I recall the person that is responsible for this >>>>>>> movie vault thing also runs a legit company. I would find it difficult >>>>>>> to believe that he has not checked into this because no one would want >>>>>>> to put their business assets at risk. If there truly is an >>>>>>> investigation then prove it. I get pretty annoyed when people claim >>>>>>> something, but cannot or do not provide any reference to back those >>>>>>> claims. And for the record I do not condone pirating of any kind and >>>>>>> believe that regardless of accessibility issues even blind people must >>>>>>> follow the laws. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 27, 2012, at 10:51 PM, Christine Grassman wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Naturally, if the moderator deems this discussion verboten, I will >>>>>>>> refrain further, but I would feel remiss not to point out the >>>>>>>> following for consideration: >>>>>>>> 1. As of several hours ago, there was nothing on the FBI's official >>>>>>>> web site regarding an investigation, nor were there any press releases >>>>>>>> or other comparable references to an investigation of the movie vault. >>>>>>>> A reference would be appreciated; mere speculation or rumor could be >>>>>>>> deemed libelous. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. The problem industries have with illegal file-sharing is loss of >>>>>>>> revenue. Since, at least in the United States, there is virtually no >>>>>>>> way to purchase audio-described movies or television shows, the >>>>>>>> industry is not being cheated of revenue. >>>>>>>> 3. The files are straight audio, with no ability, for example, to >>>>>>>> "watch" with sighted peers while having the benefit of the audio >>>>>>>> description. This is not at all remotely similar to downloading a film >>>>>>>> for the family to watch. That being said, the vast majority of the >>>>>>>> sighted community does this with impunity, even though many of the >>>>>>>> shows and movies they download can be seen for free when they are are >>>>>>>> shown on television. We, on the other hand, cannot even enjoy full >>>>>>>> access to these shows when they *are* on television. Either they are >>>>>>>> not audio-described at all, or it is not easy to turn on the secondary >>>>>>>> audio channel, or a particular station only carries foreign language >>>>>>>> broadcasts on the SAC rather than audio description. Comparing access >>>>>>>> to audio-described movies and shows in mp3 format to the type of >>>>>>>> file-sharing which goes on 24/7 on hundreds and thousands of sites is >>>>>>>> a stretch. >>>>>>>> 4. If the government and/or the involved industries wish to do >>>>>>>> something about the existence of resources like the movie vault, the >>>>>>>> former should mandate, and the latter should provide a market from >>>>>>>> which we can obtain these items. I have been able to watch a >>>>>>>> non-described movie with others after listening to an mp3 file and >>>>>>>> tell another blind person what is going on thanks to that previous >>>>>>>> experience. My two blind children have been able to enjoy fare which >>>>>>>> their peers enjoyed months or years ago. Until the entertainment >>>>>>>> industry levels the playing field, I will utilize resources like the >>>>>>>> movie vault with the same guiltless pleasure I take in bookshare.org >>>>>>>> (and, by the way, it is possible to download books from bookshare.org >>>>>>>> which are available commercially.) We cannot use the Kindle as others >>>>>>>> do. WE cannot use the Nook. We are severely limited in what we can >>>>>>>> access independently when it comes to entertainment, and we must even >>>>>>>> still fight for access to education at every level, despite >>>>>>>> technological advances. Holding us to the same standards as the vast >>>>>>>> majority of illegal file-sharers is legally, morally, and >>>>>>>> economically inequitable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Christine >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
