On Friday 11 December 2009 01:30:26 Karl Berry wrote: > However, in general I don't see anything wrong with using > NaturallySpeaking (or proprietary software XYZ) for the specific purpose > of replacing it. That is exactly what rms had to do to bootstrap GNU, > wrt proprietary Unixes and cc's, as has been pointed out. > This thread has raised a very pointed ethical dilemma: does one sleep with the 'enemy' until one can build one's own bed?
Clearly the nascent Free Software World had to do so. I don't have a clear view of the mendacity surrounding voice-control and text- to-speech and other disability-related ideas from the blackmail of patents and lawyers. It could be that the *only* way to help people who simply CANNOT use ANY computer without them would be to make a special case and compromise in this one area. The extents of that compromise could be identified and this would prevent any snowballing effect -- it would also help identify what beds need to be built. Start a new domain: savannah.disability.org -- with a mandate and a goal. \d -- \/\/ave: [email protected] home: http://otherwise.relics.co.za/ 2D vector animation : https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/things/ Font manager : https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/fontypython/
