Hi Gigi,interesting points, but are you not perhaps making a few assumptions. Well meaning yes, but the very sort of assumptions that contribute to the problem? first, blindness is not a uniform experience for anyone. the suggestion that *every* person within the technical range of 20/200 to 0/00, with the bottom being where almost everyone thinks the entire population sits, not the less than 5% actually there, is the same, needs the same, uses the same, and can therefore be accommodated the same is well a stereotype feeding the situation now.
Instead those experiencing blindness, among other life situations, live work and create uniquely, just like everyone else in humanity. second many with other print disabilities need comparative access, screen readers, buttons because they cannot figure out the touch screens either, ways to manipulate their televisions, ease on website. Curbing helps those in chairs as well as those who may be needing it if they travel via cane or service animal. Curb tucks also help those in high heels, and many many prefer buttons to guessing regardless of how they view the world. hey I use paratransit totally, so had not noticed the curbing issue, so I do not fall into your "us blind folks" dictionary, never mind my score on the eye chart. third, why are those who experience sight disabilities, or any disabilities for that matter, but still become doctors lawyers, teachers scientists, chiropractors, councilors, factory workers, customer service reps, lieutenant governors, human rights protesters, terrorist,etc. etc. not a money making proposition? hey apple made an eleven billion dollar profit last quarter, I do not think they are losing money incorporating one feature into the he same products they sell to all...in fact they demonstrate how you make money from a common ground dictionary. The assumption that ones life situation always impacts ones ability to contribute financially feeds the dragon you wish to slay. Perhaps it is looooong time someone did the market research that will demonstrate how much, not how little business exists.
If you have heard of the field of disability studies, the goal or recent goal is to expand the understanding that *everyone* can find themselves in disabling situations. however give them the tools, or remove the barrier and they get along just fine, like the rest of the human family. Which is my point. the us verses them thinking you in your well meaning way speak of is the very foundation of the problem. the more you focus on the numbers, how large they are that benefit from access, the easier it becomes for those outside to understand that access, because on one level or another there is no outside. the more common ground you indicate between people. i. e. everyone wants to use a vending machine without making a mistake, or use their oven or make a phone call or whatever, the easier it becomes to broaden and achieve access. Perhaps more important though. the sooner people stop deciding that one cannot contribute financially if you experience any disability, and start counting out what you are buying even with ssi, the better for everyone. It is not an automatic thing that disability equals burden to society. that thinking must go, there are just too much money out there and to many millions of people who can live with more flexibility and pay for that flexibility if given a choice. The Internet is a nightmare because few are making an effort to both spread the common need message, and to make it easy for a company to create an accessible site, even if they do not know what that means. let's face it, because of the stereotypes, lots of folks cannot even understand how you use, let alone why you would have a computer. but you know what? that is none of their business. you have one, you want to visit their site, the Internet is a super highway, so treat it like one. A business owner need not understand concrete to have a business on a road, same here. Build the road as you would a street and everyone no matter how or why they need to travel on it can. The focus on browsers, on screen readers which end up excluding on wanting to get people to figure out how you live as you do only slows down access...because there is only one of you. put ten people in a room with the same label, and you get ten different ways to work with or around that label. I cannot count the times someone here has said they could not reach a site using one browser, but I could with another, simply because we choose different ways to manage the disability experience . the energy should go elsewhere. Better still to create web site designing packages with an option that says, want to insure millions of possible interested parties can reach your page? and if the person creating the site says yes, the program automatically designs the cascading style sheets that insure an edition of that site can be accessible. No trying to explain what frankly cannot be experience. Mine is a long reply, but here is the bottom line. *no one* lives in your body uses your eyes, or has your personal desires. all humans though have common ground needs. The sooner we change the stereotypical dictionary, the faster access arrives for everybody.
Make sense? Karen On Sat, 28 Apr 2012, 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.
