Found this persuasive.
Peter
>X-Authentication-Warning: zoom1.telepath.com: majordom set sender to
>[log in to unmask] using -f
>X-Sender: [log in to unmask]
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.0.11 (Beta)
>Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:43:11 -0500
>To: [log in to unmask]
>From: Barry Levine <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: An elegant perspective
>Sender: [log in to unmask]
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>
>+== acb-l Message from Barry Levine <[log in to unmask]> ==+
>Hi Folks,
>
>I am forwarding, here, a message posted to the Access-l list by Martin
>McCormick. I found it to be a rather cogent treatment of a couple of
>issues that have surfaced on this list recently; and, surface with great
>regularity. The issues are access to technology and unemployment among the
>Blind. In his post, Martin is responding to a couple of articles written
>about access to computers by the Blind. One article was sort of a "The cup
>is half full" treatment of the topic. The other article was a "the cup is
>half empty" treatment. I'm not advancing Martin's thoughts here because
>they are answers to all that ails us. However, he gives voice to a couple
>of notions in a rather crisp and pragmatic fashion.
>
>I asked his permission to share his post with this list.
>Herewith, Martin McCormick's post:
>
>" I received two articles on this list in the last day or
>so which are sort of bookends as far as describing the current
>state of the art in computer access by people who are blind.
>
> The first article has the subject of
>" Internet leaves disabled behind"
>
>And the second is titled
>
>"Screen Readers Open Windows for the Blind"
>
> The truth, as usual, is somewhere in the middle though
>both articles are quite accurate.
>
> My own opinion is that any software that does not have a
>security key is preferable to any similar software that does.
>I mean this strictly as a technician and not as a pirate.
>Security keys can be defeated and they tend to make life rough
>for honest people who simply happen to do something by accident
>and violate or remove the dongle. The argument that XYZ company
>will give you a new key, bla bla bla is like saying that if you
>rig a shotgun to your back door to kill a burglar, you will pay
>the hospital bills or funeral expenses of any good neighbors or
>fire fighters who try to render assistance should someone see
>smoke or water coming out from your house.
>
> I also think that the article about the two most popular
>screen readers politely touched on the dirty little fact that
>both are quite expensive. Sure, third parties such as us tax
>payers will and often do buy these products for those who need
>them, but it is like medical care. Unless you come up with a
>system, somebody always gets left out or receives sub standard
>service for, of course, the best of reasons.
>
> There are mechanisms that could have been and still can
>be devised to fix the problem, but nobody even gives them much
>lip service these days.
>
> One would be for Microsoft who is basically running the
>show in commercial computing to buy a copy of JFW or Window-eyes,
>stick it neatly in to every copy of Windows sold, and charge each
>buyer a couple of Bucks more so that the two private companies
>that developed the software get paid for their efforts. If you
>need it, it's there.
>
> The other mechanism which is unpopular for several
>reasons is for Microsoft to write their own screen reader.
>
> Actually, the first model is done all the time in the
>manufacturing sector. Most products that we buy are made of
>parts that somebody else makes well and the final manufacturer
>simply assembles in to a finished car, washing machine, or book
>case.
>
> I am one of the lucky 30% with a good job. My job mostly
>involves use of UNIX/Linux, lots of shell scripting and C
>programming, etc. I don't really need Windows that much, but it
>would be nice to not have this problem. My point is that the
>out-of-pocket expenses which can double the cost of a work
>station, especially where Windows NT is involved, is simply one
>more of many roadblocks that keep the statistics as bad as they
>are.
>
> As a tax-payer who is also blind, I want the public or
>whoever else pays for this software to get a good deal so that
>it is everywhere. It especially needs to be in schools and
>should just be there to be switched on like IPX networking or
>tcp/ip networking.
>
> Part of the reason why it isn't done like that is that it
>hasn't been done. What a lousy reason for anything. Only a
>clever lawyer or someone trying to win a debate could argue that
>universal access is not a good thing. One never buys a
>television and has to specify sound, also. One never buys a car
>and has to add that they would like breaks, please as the
>pedestrians in their neighborhood are all loosing their third
>dimension at an alarming rate.
>
> My point is that we look at these employment statistics
>and marvel at how bad they are, but don't seem to understand that
>the more difficult it is to do simple things, the more people
>will just say, "Why bother?" and give up. When that is a
>potential worker, that's sad. When that is a business owner or
>school administrator, that is a disaster."
>
>Martin McCormick 405 744-7572 Stillwater, OK
>OSU Center for Computing and Information services Data Communications Group
>
>************************************************************
>* ACB-L is maintained and brought to you as a service *
>* of the American Council of the Blind. *
>************************************************************
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
|
