Really? The inconvenience outweights the benefits? I scan and ocr books all the time and unless i want perfection very little proofreading is necessary. I haven't noticed the joy being sucked out of my reading by a little effort! Yes, more work needs to be done in this area but meanwhile I will do what I need to do and thoroughly enjoy the results while I am doing it! I remember the days when there was absolutely nothing I could do in a library without a reader and there wasn't any such thing as "online".
-- Cheryl Go beyond the Christmas story this year; meet Immanuel (God with us), Jesus, the crucified Savior, Christ, the risen Lord. On Dec 19, 2013, at 1:20 PM, eric oyen <eric.o...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can do just that, but the inconvenience of doing so vastly outweighs the > benefits. Also, there are restrictions in US copyright law that specifically > prohibits this kind of activity (and there doesn't appear to be a listed set > of exceptions) for the individual. Also, there is the time involved to scan, > proof read and correct. That kind of takes the joy out of reading. > > -eric > > On Dec 19, 2013, at 1:31 AM, Sandi Jazmin Kruse wrote: > >> 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. > > -- > 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.
