Pertaining to the article, I wrote the following when forwarding it to my wife.
"This is good as far as it goes--but like all such screeds, it goes too far in some directions!  The author is intent upon
negatively characterizing the state-of-the-art/industry, and focussed too much on "what not to do" and "not on models
of positive examples".  Another aspect is, she didn't speak at all to the pervaisive ignorance within the disabilities
"potential user" base with respect to what is technically possible at the moment, nor, on the ignorance within the
"potential user" base with respect to how to appropriately use any particular technology.  Unfortunately, this is a far more
complicated problem on all scores than the author indicates.  Remember that those she praises, are themselves,
exceptional more knowledgeable than average disabled users, and have their own political, professional and
ideological/personal axes to grind in the arena of Adaptive Technologies which have been, are now, or might be
introduced into the Disabilities MarketPlace."

Consumerism is a double-edged sword.  For it to be of utility, potential and actual consumers of technology must be
educated, not only in what the technology can do for them, but what they must do for themselves with or without
technological assistance.




On Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:35:02 -0500, David Poehlman wrote:

>we are getting a bit affield of the topic on this thread.  I am blind
>and I do not "come".  Many blind do not "come".  The real need here is
>for all types of people to work together on these projects.  I do not
>believe that disabled individuals are the only ones quallified to
>determine what technology will make the most use of and enhance
>productive and independance skills and we've seen a lot of evidence for
>this as well.  I praise the high school student for his interest and
>effort and it can be part of a solution to a problem.  The principle is
>a good one but at my age, it seems to me that this might be a perfect
>opportunity for someone to have a job or several some ones to have a
>job.  There are many combinations of sollutions to this that would
>create jobs.  I think often we under-estemate the power and purpose of
>the human being in the solution equasion.  I know of lots of people with
>lots of technology to "empower" them who are still sitting around being
>unemployed and recieving government assistance for one reason or another
>most being that empowerment comes from within.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Steve Hoad" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:23 AM
>Subject: Re: Assistive Technology Should Empower, Not "Help," Disabled
>People
>
>
>posting from Windsor Maine;
>Steve Hoad
>
>Thanks for this post, Kelly!
>
>It gives me information about this "glove" that I hadn't had.
>
>It also points to the exact reason the National Federation of the Blind
>has
>broken ground for and is building the International Training and
>Research
>Institute for the Blind as an addition to the National Center in
>Baltimore.
>
>There has been much angry discussion about the garage for parking
>contained
>there, and much dispute about the need for the project.  However,
>NFB will house a research library and laboratories and classrooms in
>order
>that researchers can be working right at the center, where the blind
>come
>and the research can involve and be done by blind people.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>
>VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
>To join or leave the list, send a message to
>[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
>"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
> VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
>http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html