Hi Eric, you got me a little confused, surely if you walk down too your local library you can take a book home OCR it and read it? Am not sure about the copyright laws in the us, but i know that in Denmark, i can go down, get a normal book, take it home scan it , read it and have the exactly same access too the information, as any other person.
Eric oyen Wrote: " THe purpose of a library is the same as its always been: the free sharing of information. We the blind have as much right to access to this information that the sighted take for granted, yet the onerousness of copyright laws makes this extremely difficult. This situation is not improving (as evidenced by recent actions against both Apple and Google for their books online). Again, we get left out of consideration when such actions are taken." Eric, i am confused as stated before, are you talking about usual books[that is what i use mostly for my nursing education] my absolutely only problem is that i have too scan them, that is a bitch. a few words about ebooks. As far as i know there have always been some sort of problems with ebooks, it can of course have been changed, am not sure. I have found out for me at least the fastest way simply is go get my mane dirty , and scan it and read it and move on, it is frustrating, yes but it is workable. Kare, agree. You do as a matter fact have sighted persons who do use some sort of voiceover. Some of us have even taken it so far as too wire a mac mini into our car, listening too the mac whilst we drive. Is it fair that blind persons can't have the same access too the information as sighted? Of course not, but changes takes time. I have felt that on my own body when i started my nursing education, cause i am so eye limited that i am only exactly qualifying. I could have bitched and whined about it ,but i am believing that constructive dialog will get me further. The last 3 years have definitely been frustrating sometimes, cause i have too work really hard too get where i want. But 1 year to go and my mac have served its right as my number one computer on my desc. I think we sometimes have too remember if you are handicapped somethings is harder, some things can't be done, but after all since we are talking about information, the most can get too it if they are willing too hop a little around. best Sandi On 12/18/13, Karen Lewellen <klewel...@shellworld.net> wrote: > oh but of course. > After all compare the number of apple screen readers there have been what > two? three at most? outspoken which did the job fantastically with > apple's input, , still can > with the right equipment, then voiceover. because apple understood the > importance of including speech for many populations. > what always blows my mind though is the assumption that voiceover exists > solely for , and benefits only individuals experiencing sight loss. The > very idea is a limitation in and of itself. > The broader the understanding that there can be more people and more > definitions of successful interaction then the one you are > personally using, the easier > it is to draw others on board for inclusion. > just my two cents having only read Tim's comments and not the rest of the > thread. > Kare > > On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Tim Kilburn wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Well said David. While I understand people’s frustration and totally >> despise discrimination, I’m not sure that I fully agree with some of the >> opinions/comments shared prior to that. >> >> I’ll chime in here to express just a few points. Way back when OS X first >> came out, I recall going down to the city to do some training with Apple >> and I commented on the lack of a screen reader within the new OS. I had >> been using OutSpoken for Mac in OS 6 through 9 and was interested in >> continuing to use the Mac as it evolved. In normal Apple fashion, no real >> concrete things were said but it certainly was hinted that they were >> working on something of their own instead of having an outside vender >> developing such an animal. My point is here that I don’t believe that it >> was the noise made by the blind community that got Apple on the screen >> reader and accessibility wagon, I’m pretty sure that it was in the cards >> for quite a while. I certainly know that magnification and other >> accessibility features were built right in to the MacOS back in the late >> 80s,. I don’t believe for a minute that accessibility is not a priority. >> >> The old saying that you attract more flies to honey than you do to crap >> comes to mind. Constructive dialog and collaboration usually get better >> results than ranting and raving. Expressing frustration and asserting >> yourself and your rights are fine, but speculation and exaggeration seldom >> result in positive productivity. >> >> Later… >> >> Tim Kilburn >> Fort McMurray, AB Canada >> >> On Dec 18, 2013, at 1:33 PM, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Wow, such interesting arguments. When eBook readers do not have built-in >>> speakers, speech output is impossible. When the page of the book is a >>> picture of the page, a scanned image, speaking that page is impossible. >>> When the law is written such that the copyright holder has more rights >>> around who can and cannot access the book than the potential reader has, >>> accessing the book may not be legally possible. >>> >>> If you want to just flail around ineffectually making lots of noise but >>> not necessarily getting very far, your stated approach can have limited >>> success. However, would it not be better to learn the specifics in any >>> particular situation so you can actually become effective? For instance, >>> the author's guild is focused on keeping the copyrights law strong since >>> writing and controlling who and how the book is read specifically effects >>> the author's income. Authors do not earn any money for books which are >>> checked out of libraries. However, people who really like books they read >>> in libraries have a greater chance of purchasing their own copy. The >>> argument against text-to-speech in all eReaders has actually been, if >>> text to speech is used, people will not purchase the recorded versions of >>> books, and the recorded versions are much more profitable. This is why >>> NLS is so strict about who can access their professional recordings. >>> >>> When software is being designed, adding text-to-speech is significantly >>> less difficult than adding TTS access at a later date. The same is true >>> for wheelchair access to buildings. >>> >>> Depending on how the code is written, adding TTS and screen-reader >>> navigation may well be extremely complex. In some cases, the entire >>> operating system needs to be rewritten in order to add TTS and spoken >>> navigation. To rewrite an OS can take a few years. You have no idea how >>> long the original software was being developed before the company >>> released the product, so the blanket statement that adding speech is a >>> trivial matter, is completely incorrect in most cases. >>> >>> Bugs should be fixed quickly. I love this statement. It demonstrates >>> complete and total ignorance. Bugs usually take a lot longer to track >>> down and correct than adding new features. Operating systems are >>> extremely complex. Bugs may have several causes. Changing code to repair >>> one bug may cause a worse bug somewhere else in the system. Back when I >>> studied programming in university, I spent most of my programming time >>> tracking down, correcting, and then tracking down the bugs that the >>> corrections generated. Sometimes, I left minor bugs because they did not >>> impair the program's primary function, and I could not get the program to >>> run any other way. >>> >>> All that said, unless you can either get a strong public upswell behind >>> you to get laws changed, or you can develop good will between you and the >>> developers, ineffectual flailing around may cause as much harm as good to >>> your efforts. >>> >>> David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA >>> Email: dchitten...@gmail.com >>> Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On 19 Dec 2013, at 8:35, eric oyen <eric.o...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> well, when I get what I want in a timely manner, I don't worry about it. >>>> Its when I get substandard service, features or it takes a lot longer >>>> than it should to get them,, then I am one of the most complaining >>>> bastards out there. I make no bones about it, I expect excellence and >>>> anything less deserves attention to resolve. >>>> >>>> Take, for example: the book famine for the blind. We have the same >>>> rights as the general public to access media, yet there are those that >>>> are fighting us tooth and nail because they don't want to deal with the >>>> problem. The American Authors ild is particularly strident on this. They >>>> won't allow the publication of content for the blind unless we sign up >>>> on a special registry (does anyone at the library have to do this just >>>> to borrow a book?). >>>> >>>> How about the E-book consortium which is trying to get a waiver based on >>>> flimsy reasons (such as design modifications to the hardware, etc). Most >>>> all functions on these devices are in SOFTWARE and is not difficult to >>>> code for. Yet Amazon (and others) seek to get that waiver knowing full >>>> well they are locking out a non-trivial market segment. >>>> >>>> Now apple did give us accessibility. However, that wouldn't have >>>> happened if these two conditions were not met: >>>> 1. we bitched to them for 4 years before they took notice >>>> 2. the blind represent the 2nd largest market segment for computer and >>>> smartphone technology among the disabled. >>>> >>>> in the 1970's, the deaf demanded (and got) close captioning (which >>>> started showing up on TV in the early 1980's). >>>> 2. wheel chair users fought for 20 years for accessibility rights (and >>>> got them with the ADA in 1992). >>>> Now, we the blind are the last to get anything and we are having to >>>> fight tooth and nail to get it. >>>> >>>> My point is this: we are being put last before anyone else. We get >>>> treated like incompetent idiots, yelled at because they think blindness >>>> equals deafness and generally get disrespected in general public. If you >>>> are happy with this situation, fine. Just don't expect the rest of us to >>>> just lay down and accept it. I want whats mine and I will work to get >>>> it. If this means that I go into court to get what is legally mine, I >>>> will. Why be satisfied with anything less than what everyone else gets >>>> without even asking for it? >>>> >>>> If anyone says I can't do a thing because of my blindness, then they had >>>> better stay out of my way while I prove them wrong (in the most public >>>> manner possible). >>>> >>>> We have rights and its time we had them enforced. >>>> >>>> -eric >>>> >>>>> On Dec 18, 2013, at 2:52 AM, Krister Ekstrom wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, and it doesn’t matter if we get what we want, because then we >>>>> whimper and whine about the fact that we have gotten what we want, >>>>> either it is too late, too little, too much or just plain spoken the >>>>> wrong way. I know that what i now will say is gonna offend people and i >>>>> apologize in advance for that, but if we bash Apple accessibility and >>>>> Apple decides that they don’t want to have anything whatsoever to do >>>>> with the blind community then it’s a catastrophy that we deserve. Don’t >>>>> misunderstand me, pointing to bugs and things that aren’t right isn’t >>>>> wrong and shall be done provided it’s done in a constructive, polite >>>>> and creative way, complaining serves no purpose and in the long run >>>>> could end up really badly for us. >>>>> /Krister >>>>> >>>>>> 18 dec 2013 kl. 03:42 skrev David Tanner <david.tanner...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, Robert it probably does more to hurt all blind users of Apple >>>>>> devices than it ever will to help make things better. But, as I am >>>>>> sure you known blind people have a long history of being hateful, >>>>>> spiteful, not appreciating what is done for them, and constant >>>>>> complainers. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my accessible iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 7:53 AM, ROBERT CARTER <nc5rn...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the idea that accessibility is less important to Apple since >>>>>>> the death of Steve Jobs is nothing more than pure speculation and if >>>>>>> anyone can prove otherwise, I would love to see the evidence. I see >>>>>>> no value in such comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robert Carter >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Scott B. <sb356...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Absolutely right. They can talking to engineering. But >>>>>>>> engeeniering has the final say. I agree since the great Steve Jobs >>>>>>>> has passed we're probably not seeing as much interaction from >>>>>>>> Accessibility as people saw before. To sum it up very briefly >>>>>>>> Accessibility is where you take the accessibility suggestions or >>>>>>>> problems. They either act upon them y supporting you the person who >>>>>>>> needs help or passing it on to the engineering team by escalation. >>>>>>>> Please also keep in mind these are tier 2 support personnel so they >>>>>>>> can't know everything either so be easy on these people. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 12/17/2013 03:37, Ray Foret Jr wrote: >>>>>>>>> Of late, I have noticed complaints against the Apple accessibility >>>>>>>>> team as if to suggest that we are being ignored. It seems to be >>>>>>>>> the belief of some that the Apple accessibility team fixes >>>>>>>>> accessibility bugs and problems with Voice Over. I do not believe >>>>>>>>> that this is the case. It is my belief that the Apple >>>>>>>>> accessibility team has, in fact, a very limited role at Apple. >>>>>>>>> Frankly, with the passing of the late great Steve Jobs, that role >>>>>>>>> has perhaps demenished greatly. I believe that the Apple >>>>>>>>> accessibility team never has had actual decision making capacity >>>>>>>>> with respect to actual implementation of fixes for Voice Over. >>>>>>>>> They didn’t even have this power under Steve Jobs. Unless I am >>>>>>>>> very much mistaken, all the accessibility team has any power to do >>>>>>>>> is to forward our findings over to the development teams but >>>>>>>>> nothing more. They cannot even tell us whether or not our reports >>>>>>>>> will be acted upon. Now, this last is most likely a part of >>>>>>>>> Apple’s non disclosure policy: however, I suspect that even if >>>>>>>>> this was not so, Apple’s accessibility team would not be informed >>>>>>>>> in any case. In short, it seems that the only function that this >>>>>>>>> accessibility team has and will ever have at Apple is not much more >>>>>>>>> than a kind of clearing house of feedback from us blind users. I >>>>>>>>> cannot help wonder how many Apple app developmental teams look at >>>>>>>>> submissions from the accessibility team and say to themselves, “Oh, >>>>>>>>> no, not again.”. I suspect that this explains why it is that our >>>>>>>>> reports seem to go unheeded. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sent from my Mac, the only computer with full accessibility for the >>>>>>>>> blind built-in! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>>>>> The Constantly Barefooted Ray, still a very happy Mac and Iphone 5 >>>>>>>>> user! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Scott Berry >>>>>>>> Email: sb356...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus >>>>>>>> protection is active. >>>>>>>> http://www.avast.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>>> macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>> macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
