Rear Window captioning isn't visible to those who don't check out a reflector. If you don't want to be bothered by it, do nothing. If you want to use it, get a reflector. Who's "compromising" anything? And yes, it makes perfect sense to do exactly what you're suggesting for blind people; and if you don't want the service, don't check out a receiver (or don't tune your stereo TV to accept Descriptive Video Service audio). If you want handicap controls on your car, ask your dealer or a local specialty shop to install them for you. If you don't want them, don't ask for them.
Accomodations for the disabled are designed NOT to cause problems for those who don't wish to use them. Or do you find wider hallways, lever-based door handles, or ramps for those who don't want to climb stairs to be bothersome?
Instead of rattling off the same complaints that are likely a large part of why a public space that is required under federal law to accomodate the disabled (and yes, there are more kinds of disabilities than wheelchair and crutch users), I suggest you look into how the accomodations actually work?
But we don't have equal opportunity. That's the whole problem. Those who are not hearing-impaired or deaf can comprehend the dialogue and get much more out of the movie than we can. The accomodation to fix this problem is not that difficult to set up and has been developed already.
And the simple fact that we aren't "noticeably" disabled (don't require wheelchairs or walkers etc. to get around) doesn't mean that we aren't just as disabled as those people, and therefore are no less deserving.
Refusing to learn English is not a disability. ADD is a disorder that can be treated. Weak bladders are also not a disability but a medical problem that therapy exists for. Being sick or a foreigner is NOT a disability.
Indeed. I use my hearing-aid adapter cable, though, and surprisingly sometimes I get better sound than I do with speakers (clearer vocals, anyway). I'm hearing-impaired, but I can hear fairly well and I'm perfectly capable of listening to music... if I already know the lyrics. The problem lies with speech I have no transcripts for -- which is exactly what you get in theaters.
When I buy a new Elton John album (the only artist whose CDs I'll buy these days), I read along with the liner notes (or look up the song on eltonography.com) until I have memorized the lyrics. Take away the liner notes and I'm usually unable to decipher all the words.
I actually blew my doctors out of the water with how well I can actually function with this hearing loss. When they talk to me, then look at my audiogram, they can't believe I barely have the "accent" that deaf people do.
I went through many years of speech therapy, though, to be able to do that.
Often the accomodations are little devices that give you a pair of headphones to wear. Great idea... except... I can't use the type of headphones they use! I have a special adapter that uses a 1/8" phono jack. Simple, right?
Look into the rear-window captioning I mentioned above. Those who don't check out a reflector from the ushers won't see the text (it's provided by an LED dot matrix sign at the back of the room, which prints the text in reverse).
Oh come now. Telling someone how to remove software installed without their consent = felony? Bullshit. I do support work regularly. Two guesses what most people call me about. The second doesn't count.
By your reasoning I should be on freakin' death row!
I'm hearing impaired. Captions are required for me to be able to watch movies or TV. Yet theaters do not provide this vital service to their disabled patrons (the only one that does in my area is a science museum with rear-window captioning installed in its IMAX theater).
This is why I will wait for the DVD unless it is a movie I really can't wait to see, and even then I have to know the basic story first (like LOTR and the Star Wars films). I have no choice but to wait for the DVD release.
Whatever happened to the class-action lawsuit that was planned to force this accomodation to be added under the ADA? This is, I feel, a valid reason to bring suit. If there's space for wheelchairs, they're accomodating the visibly physically handicapped -- but those of us with that invisible disability get stiffed.
(Oh, and the overpriced food is another thing... stop whining that people bring in their own food when you're putting the screws to people. Oh, and maybe you should go into that Walgreens across the street someday, which is selling "theater size" boxes of candy for HALF what you are!)
The US government did actually order MS to be broken up into two companies, one producing OSes only and the other apps only.
Like a spoiled little baby, MS whined and cried and complained that it wasn't getting its way, and the pathetic excuse for a DOJ we have gave in.
That's NOT how you discourage a whiny child from whining, and indeed has proven to not have done a damn thing to fix the real problem: that the kid is too big for its britches.
I think it's immoral to force someone to lower their prices under threat of stealing (sorry copyright infringing) their product.
That actually is a legitimately recognized (by economists) effect on the price of items. The demand curve for a given item is in part determined by the level of theft/infringement/copying for any item. You can't accurately model any situation without accounting for all factors.
For any price point there will be varying levels at which there will be theft/copying. Look at gas prices, for instance -- more people drive off without paying as the price goes up. And this is factored into supply/demand curves which are used to set the optimal price.
Using a piece of software doesn't deny you the ability to use it at the same time, is why. A physical good can only be taken or used by one person at a given time, in most cases. A software application is different. You and I can use it at the exact same time, and if you didn't know I was using it (i.e. if I didn't tell you), you wouldn't know. You are not being barred from doing anything by the absence of the item.
We can return a car to a dealer within a day or two with no penalty, in many places. We can return items to the store they were purchased from if they don't meet our needs. And yet, we don't have the same ability with software (I personally have been refused a refund for defective software that was not compatible with some of my hardware, and did not find out until I tried to run it; today, I know better and would have disputed the charge to my credit card).
People don't like being screwed over that way. So they correct the problem, and if they're satisfied, pay. Just because someone else thinks everyone should trust them to make something right doesn't mean they will believe it. People have been screwed over too often by shoddy workmanship and uncaring merchants.
Enough people buy software that they try out and like that that's not a problem. This comments section is full of such stories and so are the comments attached to the article.
And suppose you have some closed-source software that you bought from a friend who legitimately was no longer using it and passed it on to you. You're using it legally. But they'd still count it as pirated because, under the right of first sale, they didn't get a cut of that subsequent sale.
The idiots who can't even track a package that has a barcode on it? The USPS is a joke. If you call to complain that a package is late, they'll tell you "oh, sometimes tracking doesn't show where it is until it gets there." Then why am I even paying extra for tracking?
No, USPS is NOT the answer. I trust UPS/Fedex/DHL more than USPS. And that will remain the case until they get their act together and start providing real traffic like the big three do.
As in, you want to have your cake and eat it, too. You say you want to run OS X on non-Apple hardware -- yet one of the main reasons people like OS X is that It Just Works. You know what kind of hardware it's going to be used with when programming it, so there's fewer points of failure.
Now, run it on a kludged together box. And it's not gonna be as reliable, now is it?
Seems like everything Apple does is about to kill it, considering they can't even twitch without someone complaining they're doing something wrong.
Actually, you don't know that. No one knows what they are up to. Please don't make statements without explaining they're based on wholly unsubstantiated rumor. (And a rather impractical rumor at that!)
I love their alfredo sauce, so I downloaded a recipe describing how to make similar-tasting sauce, and have successfully made said sauce at home. Is that cheating? I doubt it. I never signed any agreements, before or after eating the food, not to ever try to duplicate the taste. And since when is changing two bytes in one file "cheating"? That's not reverse engineering or decompiling.
If you don't download the file, you don't know whether it's the whole movie, or a review of it, or another work using a bit of it (you can republish small amounts of copyrighted stuff for a number of reasons) or just a mislabelled file. Don't forget that these are the same guys who've sued people for totally unrelated stuff that just happens to share part of its name with a movie or whatever.
And I hate the kind of knee-jerk "oh, that's crap, just secure windows better". Haven't you noticed that there's all kinds of problems out there that haven't been patched yet that are still causing ownings? Haven't you noticed that the average idiot just uses whatever OS comes on their computer? Given that most computers come with winblows on them, guess what, most people will use that unsecure piece of junk (and it's still not really secure even if you try to keep up with the patches).
People are stupid, deal with it. Since they won't bother to install anything that didn't come with the machine much of the time, a perfectly good way to deal with it IS to say "get a machine that comes with a different OS on it".
Slashdot Mirror
Rear Window captioning isn't visible to those who don't check out a reflector. If you don't want to be bothered by it, do nothing. If you want to use it, get a reflector. Who's "compromising" anything? And yes, it makes perfect sense to do exactly what you're suggesting for blind people; and if you don't want the service, don't check out a receiver (or don't tune your stereo TV to accept Descriptive Video Service audio). If you want handicap controls on your car, ask your dealer or a local specialty shop to install them for you. If you don't want them, don't ask for them.
Accomodations for the disabled are designed NOT to cause problems for those who don't wish to use them. Or do you find wider hallways, lever-based door handles, or ramps for those who don't want to climb stairs to be bothersome?
Instead of rattling off the same complaints that are likely a large part of why a public space that is required under federal law to accomodate the disabled (and yes, there are more kinds of disabilities than wheelchair and crutch users), I suggest you look into how the accomodations actually work?
But we don't have equal opportunity. That's the whole problem. Those who are not hearing-impaired or deaf can comprehend the dialogue and get much more out of the movie than we can. The accomodation to fix this problem is not that difficult to set up and has been developed already.
And the simple fact that we aren't "noticeably" disabled (don't require wheelchairs or walkers etc. to get around) doesn't mean that we aren't just as disabled as those people, and therefore are no less deserving.
Refusing to learn English is not a disability. ADD is a disorder that can be treated. Weak bladders are also not a disability but a medical problem that therapy exists for. Being sick or a foreigner is NOT a disability.
Indeed. I use my hearing-aid adapter cable, though, and surprisingly sometimes I get better sound than I do with speakers (clearer vocals, anyway). I'm hearing-impaired, but I can hear fairly well and I'm perfectly capable of listening to music... if I already know the lyrics. The problem lies with speech I have no transcripts for -- which is exactly what you get in theaters.
When I buy a new Elton John album (the only artist whose CDs I'll buy these days), I read along with the liner notes (or look up the song on eltonography.com) until I have memorized the lyrics. Take away the liner notes and I'm usually unable to decipher all the words.
I actually blew my doctors out of the water with how well I can actually function with this hearing loss. When they talk to me, then look at my audiogram, they can't believe I barely have the "accent" that deaf people do.
I went through many years of speech therapy, though, to be able to do that.
Often the accomodations are little devices that give you a pair of headphones to wear. Great idea ... except ... I can't use the type of headphones they use! I have a special adapter that uses a 1/8" phono jack. Simple, right?
Except the damn things don't have phono jacks!
Look into the rear-window captioning I mentioned above. Those who don't check out a reflector from the ushers won't see the text (it's provided by an LED dot matrix sign at the back of the room, which prints the text in reverse).
Oh come now. Telling someone how to remove software installed without their consent = felony? Bullshit. I do support work regularly. Two guesses what most people call me about. The second doesn't count.
By your reasoning I should be on freakin' death row!
I'm hearing impaired. Captions are required for me to be able to watch movies or TV. Yet theaters do not provide this vital service to their disabled patrons (the only one that does in my area is a science museum with rear-window captioning installed in its IMAX theater).
... stop whining that people bring in their own food when you're putting the screws to people. Oh, and maybe you should go into that Walgreens across the street someday, which is selling "theater size" boxes of candy for HALF what you are!)
This is why I will wait for the DVD unless it is a movie I really can't wait to see, and even then I have to know the basic story first (like LOTR and the Star Wars films). I have no choice but to wait for the DVD release.
Whatever happened to the class-action lawsuit that was planned to force this accomodation to be added under the ADA? This is, I feel, a valid reason to bring suit. If there's space for wheelchairs, they're accomodating the visibly physically handicapped -- but those of us with that invisible disability get stiffed.
(Oh, and the overpriced food is another thing
You can't prosecute a Thai citizen (random example) from inside the U.S. because he sent you spam.
If you do business in a country or state, you have to abide by its laws. That's part of the basis of do-not-call lists.
Shouldn't that be "pigeonshitting"?
The US government did actually order MS to be broken up into two companies, one producing OSes only and the other apps only.
Like a spoiled little baby, MS whined and cried and complained that it wasn't getting its way, and the pathetic excuse for a DOJ we have gave in.
That's NOT how you discourage a whiny child from whining, and indeed has proven to not have done a damn thing to fix the real problem: that the kid is too big for its britches.
I think it's immoral to force someone to lower their prices under threat of stealing (sorry copyright infringing) their product.
That actually is a legitimately recognized (by economists) effect on the price of items. The demand curve for a given item is in part determined by the level of theft/infringement/copying for any item. You can't accurately model any situation without accounting for all factors.
For any price point there will be varying levels at which there will be theft/copying. Look at gas prices, for instance -- more people drive off without paying as the price goes up. And this is factored into supply/demand curves which are used to set the optimal price.
Using a piece of software doesn't deny you the ability to use it at the same time, is why. A physical good can only be taken or used by one person at a given time, in most cases. A software application is different. You and I can use it at the exact same time, and if you didn't know I was using it (i.e. if I didn't tell you), you wouldn't know. You are not being barred from doing anything by the absence of the item.
We can return a car to a dealer within a day or two with no penalty, in many places. We can return items to the store they were purchased from if they don't meet our needs. And yet, we don't have the same ability with software (I personally have been refused a refund for defective software that was not compatible with some of my hardware, and did not find out until I tried to run it; today, I know better and would have disputed the charge to my credit card).
People don't like being screwed over that way. So they correct the problem, and if they're satisfied, pay. Just because someone else thinks everyone should trust them to make something right doesn't mean they will believe it. People have been screwed over too often by shoddy workmanship and uncaring merchants.
Enough people buy software that they try out and like that that's not a problem. This comments section is full of such stories and so are the comments attached to the article.
And suppose you have some closed-source software that you bought from a friend who legitimately was no longer using it and passed it on to you. You're using it legally. But they'd still count it as pirated because, under the right of first sale, they didn't get a cut of that subsequent sale.
The idiots who can't even track a package that has a barcode on it? The USPS is a joke. If you call to complain that a package is late, they'll tell you "oh, sometimes tracking doesn't show where it is until it gets there." Then why am I even paying extra for tracking?
No, USPS is NOT the answer. I trust UPS/Fedex/DHL more than USPS. And that will remain the case until they get their act together and start providing real traffic like the big three do.
As in, you want to have your cake and eat it, too. You say you want to run OS X on non-Apple hardware -- yet one of the main reasons people like OS X is that It Just Works. You know what kind of hardware it's going to be used with when programming it, so there's fewer points of failure.
Now, run it on a kludged together box. And it's not gonna be as reliable, now is it?
Seems like everything Apple does is about to kill it, considering they can't even twitch without someone complaining they're doing something wrong.
And you know for sure what they're really up to and thus what's going to be announced? Ha. Right.
BTW, there's such a thing as a likely rumor and an unlikely one. This one is highly unlikely, even if it's possible.
We'll see. But it would be better to wait for any announcements before making such claims, especially if presenting them as fact.
Actually, you don't know that. No one knows what they are up to. Please don't make statements without explaining they're based on wholly unsubstantiated rumor. (And a rather impractical rumor at that!)
I love their alfredo sauce, so I downloaded a recipe describing how to make similar-tasting sauce, and have successfully made said sauce at home. Is that cheating? I doubt it. I never signed any agreements, before or after eating the food, not to ever try to duplicate the taste. And since when is changing two bytes in one file "cheating"? That's not reverse engineering or decompiling.
How can you be liable for infringing if you downloaded a file that isn't copyrighted (or is and the author permits free distribution)?
Why wouldn't a chunk/fragment count?
If you don't download the file, you don't know whether it's the whole movie, or a review of it, or another work using a bit of it (you can republish small amounts of copyrighted stuff for a number of reasons) or just a mislabelled file. Don't forget that these are the same guys who've sued people for totally unrelated stuff that just happens to share part of its name with a movie or whatever.
And I hate the kind of knee-jerk "oh, that's crap, just secure windows better". Haven't you noticed that there's all kinds of problems out there that haven't been patched yet that are still causing ownings? Haven't you noticed that the average idiot just uses whatever OS comes on their computer? Given that most computers come with winblows on them, guess what, most people will use that unsecure piece of junk (and it's still not really secure even if you try to keep up with the patches).
People are stupid, deal with it. Since they won't bother to install anything that didn't come with the machine much of the time, a perfectly good way to deal with it IS to say "get a machine that comes with a different OS on it".
Not everyone is as 1337 as you and me.
How does one live on the wrong side of the road for a cable modem? There's no distance limit on those.
Hi, fellow female geek. :)
Oops, misposted my reply (here) as a reply to my own comment, so this comment exists so that you get a notification e-mail. Sorry!