locked
Re: warning if you doing business

Stan Bobbitt
Hi,
I have a very similar experience to Ron’s. I was not born blind and started out in public school. I learned to read and write print and could do things like ride bikes, play ball etc. I was totally blind by
the age of 8. I learned braille and continued my education through state schools.
I too got into computers in the mid nineties and brought most of my skills up to college level.
So I started out reading with my eyes, progressed to reading with my fingers, and now I do nearly all of my reading with my ears. Although I still read a couple monthly magazines in braille.
M2C,
StanB
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Ron Canazzi
Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2020 12:22 AM
To: main@TechTalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hi Gene,
I have had an experience that is probably much different than many other blind people. For background, it is important to state that I was born a partial (partially sighted) but a very high functional partial. I could ride a bicycle, play football and baseball
with fully sighted people, swim by myself, walk to and from school by myself without sighted help and so on. Just before the age of twelve, I lost my vision rather quickly--inn about two months.
Here I was totally blind at the age of twelve. So I wanted to learn Braille very quickly. I had been an avid reader and I had a good knowledge of spelling, punctuation and grammar--for a twelve-year-old. Since for more than a year, I concentrated on learning
Braille, I put some of the other stuff aside and probably fell behind my grade level for basics such as spelling, punctuation and grammar. In addition, as Braille readers know, braille is full of contractions, one letter word representations and so on. I
learned to read Braille fluently fairly quickly. In doing so, I was able to continue to read more and more advanced books. But my spelling, punctuation and grammar skills were--in a manner of speaking--left behind. As time went on and I read more and more
complex books, my comprehension improved, but due to the issues of transitioning from sighted print reader to blind Braille reader, my spelling, punctuation and to a degree even grammar skills stayed a lower levels.
Enter the digital, computer/Kindle/whatever age in the 1990's. I began using a computer and all the other modern advances for the blind and by using spell checkers, grammar checkers and the like, my spelling, punctuation and grammar rapidly improved to college
level capabilities.
So you see, I had the exact opposite experience that some others had--being blinded quickly, trying to compensate for that quickly, falling behind and then using the modern, non Braille methodologies to catch up to speed.
It just goes to show that people are people and that blind people are people first--each with individual needs, strengths and weaknesses--and blind secondarily.
On 3/6/2020 9:03 PM, Gene wrote:
You can't assume that what you are relating as your experience is true in general and I very much doubt it. I don't know if or why it is true for you. I learned xpelling and punctuation from reading Braille. I may have learned other
things about how to write by reading Braille that I am unaware of. But my literary skill in writing and in listening hasn't gone down as I've read Braille less. I learned these skills. When I listen, I employ the same skilss as when I read Braille. When
I write, I use the same skills I learned as I learned to write. None of them are lessened by how little or how much I read Braille.
When I was in school, I comprehended and interpreted what I read as well whether I got the information from Braille or print. In my later life, I lost none of my abilities to comprehend and interpret as I read Braille less. There was
a time when I read a lot of Braille. I very seldom read much in Braille now. But, as I said, my skills in comprehension, interpretation, and writing have not gone down at all.
Thinking a little about history shows more inaccuracies in your argument. People listened long before they read. the Illiad and the Oddesey were in oral form long before they were written down. Old myths and legends were in oral form
long before they were written.
You may prefer reading. You may concentrate better. I concentrate and interpret what I read or what I listen to with equal ability. And there is simply no loss of my skills as I've read Braille less over the years.
Again, you are generalizing with no supporting evidence but your own experience and that is just your experience. You cannot build convincing arguments based on geneeralizing in these areas just from you to the whole.
I am not saying that my experience is representative of most people, but I think it is. But without studies of people to see what we can determine, I don't claim what I'm saying as fact. You have generalized throughout this discussion
as though your single personal experience is fact for all. It isn't, as I have explained by relating my experience in this message.
Also, consider that the recorded book is now very popular among sighted people. We are born listeners. Regardless of the merits of reading, it came long after listening.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
If you get the writter magazine they will tell that if you want to
be a good writter than you have to read alot. They are published
writters who make their living from their writting. For the record I
have never claimed that my writting skills are any better than any one
elses I did say that are not as they should be. This is because I don't
read like I did in school. I am only blind I am not deaf blind. I am
sure that I am not the only blind person whos writting skills are not as
they should be. It is all because we don't access to paper braille as
we should to keep our writting skills as they should be. wWhen blind
people don't read their reading will suffer as I said that mine does.
When people say that we don't braille because we have audio and screen
readers they are not telling the truth. If you never read how words are
spelled then you will sound try to guess how they are spelled by
sounding them out. As we all know not all words are spelled like they
sound. This is a very big problem if you only listen. For example if
you never read the word laugh in braille you might spell it laf because
thats the way that it sounds. Why would have any reason to think that
was wrong? You would think that that word must be spelled because thats
they it sounds. You may say why don't you just use spell check. If you
don't read then you would have no way of knowing that was the wrong way
to spell the word. Another example is people say words not the way that
should be said. All of my life I have always heard the word wash
pronounced as worsh so I would write it that way because I had no reason
to question it. Once I read the word then I knew that it was spelled
wash and not worsh. The way that people talk is very confusing to
blindpeople if you can't read for yourself. You may never know that not
all words are spelled as they sound. If you did learn proper spelling
back in school and you don't read you will forget how many words are
spelled after many years of not reading. When I was in school my
teachers did not tell me that my writting skills were very bad they
could be better and thats we are in school to learn and get our skills
as they should be. If you don't use them then you will loose them. I do
think that when I was in school my reading and writting was better than
it is now because I had to do it every day. Now I don't have to. I
have no problem with somone telling that I spelled a word wrong and even
sighted people spell words wrong so it's not a blindness thing. No one
is going to rember how every word is spelled any one can be wrong.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 4:45 PM, Ann Parsons wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I believe that Brian writes as well as he is able. Not sure what his
> difficulties may be e.g. learning differences, DeafBlindness,
> whatever. Criticizing someone who is doing their best to communicate
> is not productive. Pointing out errors, yes, privately, but calling
> someone out for commenting on mistakes made by others when he,
> himself, has made mistakes may feel good, but is, in my view,
> unproductive. That's what I was referring to, Gene.
>
> Sorry, I keep forgetting to quote stuff. This mailer doesn't quote
> automatically.
>
> Ann P.
>
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Hello Jean and Ron:
It is definitely true that people have been listening to stories much longer than they have been reading them. For centuries, people listened to Scriptures read to them in their churches long before the Gutenberg press was invented.
Years ago when I received audiobooks from the national library service in the mail, sighted people asked me how they could get audiobooks so that they could listen to them while driving or doing other things. At the time, I told them I didn’t know how they could get such books. Shortly there after, I learned that one could get audiobooks from video stores. Shortly after that, listening to audiobooks caught on nationwide. I know a woman who said that audiobooks were a Life saver for her while driving across the country because she got tired of listening to the radio and her CDs.
While in college, I knew sighted students who told me that they wished they could listen to their textbooks sometimes so that they could rest their eyes. Listening to their textbooks would enable them to process the material and study while driving and them Make more productive use of their time.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that listening to audio is not all that unusual anymore. Maybe we are coming full circle back to ancient times in this way.
Victor
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Mar 6, 2020, at 9:37 PM, Ron Canazzi <aa2vm@...> wrote:
Hi Evan,
Well this analysis while tightly argued, is like a biblical
literalist that represents a false dialectic by only examining
terminologies and factoids that support their own belief structure.
One falsehood of your argument is in semantics Since the perception
of reading has been from time immemorial the use of one's eyes and
printed material to intake facts derived by, thought of and/or
written down by others. If so, then how is it that Braille can be
thought of as the exact equivalent of print when it in fact is not.
Not only is it not the same as a standard 26 character alphabet, but
it also uses a different sense--that of the sense of touch to
extract the ideas from the materials.
In a very strict sense of the syntactical world and using at least
in part, your own rigid interpretation of 'reading' actually is,
then you as a Braille reader really aren't reading in the classic
sense of the word either.
That's why I believe that words serve only a function of
communicating basic ideas and that there must be flexibility,
discourse, investigation and relatively speaking a scientific type
analysis of each and every issue for true knowledge to be obtained.
Once again, if the importance of what is known as reading is that we
communicate ideas, then the mechanics as to what is defined as
reading should be secondary to how the ideas are being transferred.
On 3/6/2020 9:06 PM, Evan Reese wrote:
Well, I would say that listening to an audio book is not
the same as reading it, either in braille or print.
To illustrate, if I tell you a story, would you say that
you had read it? No. Now, what if I write down the story and
read it to you, either in person or on the phone. Would you
say that you had read it? I don’t think so.
Now, suppose I make a recording of me reading the story
and send it to you. Would you say that you had read it? The
only difference is that, instead of reading it to you live,
I’m reading it on tape, as we used to say.
So no, listening to someone read a book is not the same
thing as reading it oneself. You may still get the
information, but you didn’t read it if you listened to
someone else read it.
I don’t think a synthetic voice makes any difference.
True, it doesn’t know what it’s saying, but you still have
an intermediary between yourself and the actual text, you’re
still listening to (in this case), a computer translate the
actual text into words. So, even though it doesn’t
comprehend what it is translating, it is still reading to
you in the strictest sense. You are not reading when using a
synthetic voice.
But language changes, definitions change over time. It
may happen soon that people will say that they are actually
reading when they are listening to a voice, any voice,
whether human or synthetic, read to them. Many people
already say that, so I think we’re on the way. I don’t care
all that much. I’ve done it myself, said that I read a book
when I actually listened to someone else read it. I don’t
make a big deal out of it. But you asked for thoughts, and
that’s what I actually believe, even if I speak off-handedly
about reading audio books.
Evan
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking
about whether or not a person is able or not able to read
Braille. I wrote a blog post about this a while ago as
these were questions which I was considering and I'd like
to share this post with you if you have an interest in
reading it. I'm afraid that it really doesn't answer these
questions and, in fact, may raise a few additional ones
that some of us might not have considered. Here is the
post.
Consuming Books: Reading Vs.
Listening
This morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and
stumbled on a post from one of my friends who posed a
very interesting question. The question has to do with
the wording we use to convey how we consume audio books.
My friend pointed out that she’s noticing a trend, both
with blind and sighted readers, where they will use the
verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in “I just finished
listening to that book” as opposed to “I just finished
reading that book”, as if consuming a book via audio
isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First, I’ll provide a bit of background into my own
life as an avid reader. I learned how to read Braille
when I was around four and how to write it not much
later than that. I’ve always found reading Braille to be
very easy and I’ve been reading books using Braille for
about as long as I can remember. I remember the
enjoyment I always felt going to my school library,
browsing the many shelves of Braille books and being
able to check out one or two books a week, which I
always read quickly. Of course, there were many books,
known as talking books, which were recorded on
cassettes’ as well as on phonograph records. Talking
books have been available for blind and visually
impaired consumers to borrow since the 1930s, way before
audio books became popular with sighted consumers. While
I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape from my
library, Braille was always my preferred medium and,
when given a choice between Braille and audio, Braille
was always what I chose.
As I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume
books has also changed. Nearly all of the books which I
consume are done so audibly and not in Braille. There
are several reasons for this and they don’t apply to all
readers who are blind. First, most of the books which I
want to read are just not available in Braille. While
the National Library Service produces
many Braille books there are simply more titles
available in an audio format. Even then the amount of
books produced by NLS, while I greatly appreciate the
work that they do, is a drop in the bucket compared to
the amount of titles available from other suppliers. Bookshare, another
specialized library for people with print disabilities,
offers over half a million books and that number
continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35
years, offers around 80,000 human-narrated titles. Of
course, mainstream book suppliers such as the Kindle
store offer millions of books, with more constantly
being added. These specialized and mainstream suppliers
offer a much greater selection of books than what I am
able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some readers will no doubt want to remind me of the
fact that we do have Braille display technology, which
will work both with my computer as well as with my
phone. This is certainly true and a Braille display
would certainly allow me to read books from any of these
suppliers using the same Braille code that I enjoyed
using with books printed on paper. However, there are
reasons which, for me, make this an impractical
solution.
First, Braille display technology, while readily
available for many devices, is often costly. As an
example, Freedom Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille
display, the Focus 14 Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time
spending over a thousand dollars for a Braille display
is just not something which I could easily do,
considering it’s a device that I don’t truly need.
However, even if a Braille display magically dropped
onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading
either on the train or lying in bed. Reading with a
Braille display on a moving train, no matter how
portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in bed and
wanted to read a book it’s just so much easier to do
this with a small phone and would prove to be a bit less
convenient if I added even a 14-cell display.
Anyway, back to the topic. My friend was pointing out
that she has noticed that many people say they’ve
listened to a book as opposed to reading it if the book
was consumed in an audio medium, such as an audio CD or
listening to it with synthetic speech using the Kindle
app. However, this also makes me think of how we often
use the word “read” when we actually have listened to
the book.
This raises some interesting questions. When it comes
to books, is it fair to consider it reading regardless
of how it’s consumed? There are probably some sighted
people who feel that the only way to truly read a book
is to do so by processing the printed material visually.
Of course, as blind people we know this is certainly not
the case. All of us would agree that processing the
information with our fingers would just as validly be
considered reading as processing the information with
our eyes and, in that instance, there is no controversy.
However, the wording sometimes changes when we shift
from print on a page to either a human narrator or a
synthetic voice coming from a pair of speakers or from
our portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by
listening to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader,
am I wrong to say that I’ve read the book? Most blind
people would say that I’m not and I would tend to agree
with them.
However, let’s say we have an individual who is blind
who never learned how to read Braille. There are some
valid reasons for why they might not have been taught
how to read and write in Braille, such as having
neuropathy in their fingers which would prevent them
from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In such
a case, this blind individual would only be able to
consume books in an audible format. Considering this,
would we look at that blind person who didn’t know
Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves, that this
person was illiterate. We might not say that to their
face in the course of normal conversation but do we
consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then
can we say that this blind person, not knowing Braille,
has “read” a book when it was consumed by listening. If
we say no, then why is it acceptable for me to say that
I’ve read a book and my hypothetical blind person could
not say that, just because I can read Braille and he
cannot.
Let’s take this a step further and consider a fully
sighted person who, for one reason or another, never
learned how to read print. There’s no doubt that we
would conclude that this person would be considered
illiterate. Saying so is not meant as an insult but, in
this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t read is
illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have
the ability to learn Braille and the sighted person
could, with proper training, learn how to read print
but, until that individual chooses to take classes in
how to read, we would all agree that he’s illiterate.
Given that fact, would we tend to disagree with the
illiterate sighted person if he told us that he “read” a
particular book by consuming it in an audible medium?
Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t really read that
book, you listened to it.” If this is the case, then why
is it OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to
tell people that I may have read the same book by
consuming it in the exact same way but yet fewer people
would think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly, this isn’t the most important topic which
should concern us. I don’t think about it all that much
and it certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However, I
think these issues are important as it has really forced
me to think about what we mean when we speak of what it
means to be literate.
As an aside, the person who brought up this topic is
one of the proprietors of Speeddots, which
sells various tactile screen protectors for your Apple
iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth accessories as
well as rugged lightning cables with a life-time
warranty.
So, how do you feel about this? For you, does listening
to an audio book qualify as reading it? I’d love to hear
your thoughts in the comments.
David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron
Canazzi wrote:
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say you're a
good
Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who use
audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by
the way they write e-mails: is that what you're saying?
Well let me be your teacher and quote and correct your own
mistakes that you have made in your lengthy reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are trying to
say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition
of the first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille than
you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you
don't know/use/are competent in, Braille then you are not
truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails
from blind people who don't know braille there spelling
and (There should be a period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot
to be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are
misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I
don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There
should be a period after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to
audio. (there is a run on word toread that should be
separated into 'to read.')
Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read
than listen have only audio as the option all to often.
For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read
braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille.
(I guess you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille
most of my life and I would loose independence (I guess
you mean lose independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know braille.
(You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio
or computer speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but most
of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You
misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember
haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at
the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just
what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. (You
misspelled remember, having, across and probably mean the
word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you used
the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a
period after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing
Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college
back in 1987-1988 and I could have
<spelling error> donee much better if I had
braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe
blind but I had issues with the readers with
pronouncations. (you ran the words for and the
together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I remember taking test and what I heard during the test
sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made
<spelling error> sinse. (You misspelled the word
sense.)
<spelling error> If yur going to read on tape then
you must be able to speak properly and say your words
properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or at least I
think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only
tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book
to recording for the blind to be recorded. (I'm not quite
sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know
what you are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a
big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR EXAMPLE OF THE
IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY
CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES.
On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than
you are not truly literate. If you doubt this then read
emails from blind people who don't know braille there
spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then
I to will fall in to trap as well. If you truly want to
be literate then you just have toread and not just
listen to audio. Those of us who do prefer braille and
would rather read than listen have only audio as the
option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate
then I have to read braille and as I said in my email to
Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life with out braille. I
have had braille most of my life and I would loose
independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading
braille is active reading but listening to audio or
computer speech is just passive reading. I prefer to
activly read but most of the time I can't because it's
audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of
braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I
never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it
was no problem for me at all. The campus at the
Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan
covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in
1987-1988 and I could have donee much better if I had
braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I
remember taking test and what I heard during the test
sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes. If I
would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made sinse.
If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to
speak properly and say your words properly. There was
the issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2
copies of every book to recording for the blind to be
recorded. Audio is usless if I don't know what you are
saying. This is why we need braille. Braille readers
don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it
just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge
difference between not learning braille if you've lost
your site later in life. The unfortunate fact is that
even people who are blind since birth are not learning
braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50
years ago. If you are blind since birth and you don't
learn braille you miss out on basic literacy. How do
you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and
such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site
you already understand these things so knowing braille
isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@TechTalk.groups.io mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io
On Behalf Of Victor
Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM
To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose
their eyesight later in life and they find it too
difficult to learn braille. It is much easier for them
to access information by listening to audio. It’s hard
enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and
live without seeing their loved ones or other things
ever again. The last thing they want is to learn a new
skill that they may find just too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group
where are the people taught each other to use iOS
devices. While at the group one day, one of the group
leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable braille display
for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person
in the room interested in touching the device because
I knew braille and I owned a previous generation of
that device. It was not discussed, but I knew that
they were not interested because most of them had lost
their eyesight later in life. I suspect that they
found it much easier to listen to audio than reading
braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to access
information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found
it much easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to
their books, podcasts, scan documents and do
everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize
that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have
not found a way to obtain one. I also realize that not
everyone is into these types of gadgets. However, many
blind people have discovered how great these gadgets
are and how useful they can be in helping them become
more independent. For many of us, that is the route we
have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a
blind person who is not interested in learning
braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe they
just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist
now. I am also glad that low cost refreshable braille
displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss
the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from
my classes. I do not miss the days of trying to look
up words in the dictionary and dealing with a whole
bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not
miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display,
I would definitely look into obtaining the orbit
braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM,
brian mailto:bsackrider55@...
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I
would be willing to pay a few dollars to get
braille. I am not saying that I should get for free
but not to have the option is my complaint. My
local liberary use to provide braille for 10 cents
per page. I was also told that if I provided the
paper they would braille what I wanted. They
required 67 weight paper which I can get at
Staples. All to often we are forced to except only
audio as the only format that is available. Braille
will always be my prefered format because I prefer
to read for myself instead of just listen. You say
that you hate braille but you can use it well I feel
the same about audio. Why do we have to be locked in
to just one format? How many people would rather
read than listen? Blind or sighted. People who
prefer to read than should be commended instead of
being kind of bashed for it. If not many blind
people request braille than it should be no trouble
to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to
produce once you have the equipment. my liberary
had no trouble all they needed was files in
microsoft word and the paper and they were good to
go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my church
all in grade 2 braille. It was really great to
finally be an active participant in the service
instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read
along with everyone else the verses and hyms and
classes lessons is a great feeling you just can't
discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's
kind of like having access to dvs you can finally
know what is going on when there is all of that dead
air. I was able to read infront of the church and
be active in bible study and even lead the groop all
using braille. I do use braille menus when ever
possible even if I don't really need it just to let
them see that somone is acually using it. Braille
has given me a very full life and I don't know whear
my life would be with out braille. I feel that
every blind person who is able to read braille
should learn it. I do understand that there are
blind people who have medical conditions that
prevents them from being able to read braille. For
them they have no choice but to use audio but I do
have the choice I just don't like being limited to
just audio only and not braille. You hate braille
and I hate audio. a good example of when I wish
that I had braille instead of a file was when I
requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my
lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me
there was no braille manual but there was a print
manual. I had to go to the help file on the machine
and try to find what I wanted. When I called the
paper office they asked what files my machine could
read. If I had a braille manual I could have just
looked it up while on the phone and gave them the
answer. I had to call back after I went to the help
file and found it. This is very time concuming I
can look up somthing much faster in braille than any
other format. I am not saying that I can do it as
quick as a sighted person can with print but for me
it's the fastest way for me to get the job done.
When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the
blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all
of our books were in braille. There was no I don't
want to learn it you had to. I will say that I can
certainly listen much faster than I can read but
when it comes to looking up somthing braille is
faster hands down. I have been blind since birth
and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's like the
sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn the
opticon at the rehab center but they would not let
me because they said that I was not fast enough. I
felt that I was learning and making progress and I
should had the right to continue but they said no.
If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they
should beallowed to do so. If I am determind to
learn somthing that then I will even though it might
take more time then the teacher would like. I guess
that modavation means nothing. If somone reallly
wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several
month to do so they should not be told no you can't
continue. If companies had the equipment to produce
braille they could charge me for the cost of the
paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave
wrote:
Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the
hassle it is to create
it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there
were many times when I
would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio
format. many times have I had to just Wing it,
learning by Guess and
by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the
Blind, Guessing was
not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong
could ruin your
day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To
produce it is just not an
easy task. And I would guess that most
manufacturers of items for
the blind, may not want to hire another Staff
member to do nothing
but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing
such a thing is
considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF
format, if not an
Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer,
I can then print
out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so
I do without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an
Audio to Text
converter, and then print that file out in
Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I
need to go On Line
to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least
that much, but I
always look to see if I can just download the
manual so I don't need
to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over
and over again to
look for Work Arounds for doing many things in
Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate
it. So a Braille
Manual would be a waste of resources to send me
one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the
Company doesn't send
a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF,
or even Audio, if
you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is
to convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me,
and can't afford a
Braille Printer, there are Services that will take
your Manual file
and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all
part of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired
Readers to read
Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before
smart Phones had
built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them
$10 an hour too. this
was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years
now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So
often, regardless of
what Format it comes in, the information in the
thing is totally Nuts!
It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is
a Translation of
something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese
to Spanish and then
Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so
poorly written, lack
helpful information and seem to be missing a great
deal of actual
instructional information and are next to useless
in any format.
Grumpy Dave
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
That's an interesting story and it shows how wrong
you can be if you assume one person's experience represents everyone to the
point where it is assumed to be fact.
Gene
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
Hi Gene, I have had an experience that is probably much
different than many other blind people. For background, it is important to
state that I was born a partial (partially sighted) but a very high functional
partial. I could ride a bicycle, play football and baseball with fully
sighted people, swim by myself, walk to and from school by myself without
sighted help and so on. Just before the age of twelve, I lost my vision
rather quickly--inn about two months. Here I was totally blind at the age
of twelve. So I wanted to learn Braille very quickly. I had been an
avid reader and I had a good knowledge of spelling, punctuation and grammar--for
a twelve-year-old. Since for more than a year, I concentrated on learning
Braille, I put some of the other stuff aside and probably fell behind my grade
level for basics such as spelling, punctuation and grammar. In addition,
as Braille readers know, braille is full of contractions, one letter word
representations and so on. I learned to read Braille fluently fairly
quickly. In doing so, I was able to continue to read more and more
advanced books. But my spelling, punctuation and grammar skills were--in a
manner of speaking--left behind. As time went on and I read more and more
complex books, my comprehension improved, but due to the issues of transitioning
from sighted print reader to blind Braille reader, my spelling, punctuation and
to a degree even grammar skills stayed a lower levels. Enter the digital,
computer/Kindle/whatever age in the 1990's. I began using a computer and
all the other modern advances for the blind and by using spell checkers, grammar
checkers and the like, my spelling, punctuation and grammar rapidly improved to
college level capabilities. So you see, I had the exact opposite
experience that some others had--being blinded quickly, trying to compensate for
that quickly, falling behind and then using the modern, non Braille
methodologies to catch up to speed. It just goes to show that people are
people and that blind people are people first--each with individual needs,
strengths and weaknesses--and blind secondarily.
On 3/6/2020 9:03 PM, Gene wrote:
You can't assume that what you are relating as your experience is true in
general and I very much doubt it. I don't know if or why it is true for
you. I learned xpelling and punctuation from reading Braille. I
may have learned other things about how to write by reading Braille that I am
unaware of. But my literary skill in writing and in listening hasn't
gone down as I've read Braille less. I learned these skills. When
I listen, I employ the same skilss as when I read Braille. When I write,
I use the same skills I learned as I learned to write. None of them are
lessened by how little or how much I read Braille.
When I was in school, I comprehended and interpreted what I read as well
whether I got the information from Braille or print. In my later life, I
lost none of my abilities to comprehend and interpret as I read Braille
less. There was a time when I read a lot of Braille. I very seldom
read much in Braille now. But, as I said, my skills in comprehension,
interpretation, and writing have not gone down at all.
Thinking a little about history shows more inaccuracies in your
argument. People listened long before they read. the Illiad and
the Oddesey were in oral form long before they were written down. Old
myths and legends were in oral form long before they were written.
You may prefer reading. You may concentrate better. I
concentrate and interpret what I read or what I listen to with equal
ability. And there is simply no loss of my skills as I've read Braille
less over the years.
Again, you are generalizing with no supporting evidence but your own
experience and that is just your experience. You cannot build convincing
arguments based on geneeralizing in these areas just from you to the
whole.
I am not saying that my experience is representative of most people, but
I think it is. But without studies of people to see what we can
determine, I don't claim what I'm saying as fact. You have generalized
throughout this discussion as though your single personal experience is fact
for all. It isn't, as I have explained by relating my experience in this
message.
Also, consider that the recorded book is now very popular among sighted
people. We are born listeners. Regardless of the merits of
reading, it came long after listening.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
If you get the writter magazine they will
tell that if you want to be a good writter than you have to read
alot. They are published writters who make their living from their
writting. For the record I have never claimed that my writting
skills are any better than any one elses I did say that are not as they
should be. This is because I don't read like I did in school.
I am only blind I am not deaf blind. I am sure that I am not the
only blind person whos writting skills are not as they should be. It
is all because we don't access to paper braille as we should to keep our
writting skills as they should be. wWhen blind people don't read
their reading will suffer as I said that mine does. When people say
that we don't braille because we have audio and screen readers they are
not telling the truth. If you never read how words are spelled then
you will sound try to guess how they are spelled by sounding them
out. As we all know not all words are spelled like they sound.
This is a very big problem if you only listen. For example if you
never read the word laugh in braille you might spell it laf because thats
the way that it sounds. Why would have any reason to think that was
wrong? You would think that that word must be spelled because thats
they it sounds. You may say why don't you just use spell
check. If you don't read then you would have no way of knowing that
was the wrong way to spell the word. Another example is people say
words not the way that should be said. All of my life I have always
heard the word wash pronounced as worsh so I would write it that way
because I had no reason to question it. Once I read the word then I
knew that it was spelled wash and not worsh. The way that people
talk is very confusing to blindpeople if you can't read for
yourself. You may never know that not all words are spelled as they
sound. If you did learn proper spelling back in school and you don't
read you will forget how many words are spelled after many years of not
reading. When I was in school my teachers did not tell me that my
writting skills were very bad they could be better and thats we are in
school to learn and get our skills as they should be. If you don't
use them then you will loose them. I do think that when I was in school my
reading and writting was better than it is now because I had to do it
every day. Now I don't have to. I have no problem with somone
telling that I spelled a word wrong and even sighted people spell words
wrong so it's not a blindness thing. No one is going to rember how every
word is spelled any one can be wrong.
Brian Sackrider
On
3/6/2020 4:45 PM, Ann Parsons wrote: > Hi all, > > I believe
that Brian writes as well as he is able. Not sure what his >
difficulties may be e.g. learning differences, DeafBlindness, >
whatever. Criticizing someone who is doing their best to communicate >
is not productive. Pointing out errors, yes, privately, but calling
> someone out for commenting on mistakes made by others when he,
> himself, has made mistakes may feel good, but is, in my view,
> unproductive. That's what I was referring to,
Gene. > > Sorry, I keep forgetting to quote stuff. This
mailer doesn't quote > automatically. > > Ann
P. >
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Hi Evan,
Well this analysis while tightly argued, is like a biblical
literalist that represents a false dialectic by only examining
terminologies and factoids that support their own belief structure.
One falsehood of your argument is in semantics Since the perception
of reading has been from time immemorial the use of one's eyes and
printed material to intake facts derived by, thought of and/or
written down by others. If so, then how is it that Braille can be
thought of as the exact equivalent of print when it in fact is not.
Not only is it not the same as a standard 26 character alphabet, but
it also uses a different sense--that of the sense of touch to
extract the ideas from the materials.
In a very strict sense of the syntactical world and using at least
in part, your own rigid interpretation of 'reading' actually is,
then you as a Braille reader really aren't reading in the classic
sense of the word either.
That's why I believe that words serve only a function of
communicating basic ideas and that there must be flexibility,
discourse, investigation and relatively speaking a scientific type
analysis of each and every issue for true knowledge to be obtained.
Once again, if the importance of what is known as reading is that we
communicate ideas, then the mechanics as to what is defined as
reading should be secondary to how the ideas are being transferred.
On 3/6/2020 9:06 PM, Evan Reese wrote:
Well, I would say that listening to an audio book is not
the same as reading it, either in braille or print.
To illustrate, if I tell you a story, would you say that
you had read it? No. Now, what if I write down the story and
read it to you, either in person or on the phone. Would you
say that you had read it? I don’t think so.
Now, suppose I make a recording of me reading the story
and send it to you. Would you say that you had read it? The
only difference is that, instead of reading it to you live,
I’m reading it on tape, as we used to say.
So no, listening to someone read a book is not the same
thing as reading it oneself. You may still get the
information, but you didn’t read it if you listened to
someone else read it.
I don’t think a synthetic voice makes any difference.
True, it doesn’t know what it’s saying, but you still have
an intermediary between yourself and the actual text, you’re
still listening to (in this case), a computer translate the
actual text into words. So, even though it doesn’t
comprehend what it is translating, it is still reading to
you in the strictest sense. You are not reading when using a
synthetic voice.
But language changes, definitions change over time. It
may happen soon that people will say that they are actually
reading when they are listening to a voice, any voice,
whether human or synthetic, read to them. Many people
already say that, so I think we’re on the way. I don’t care
all that much. I’ve done it myself, said that I read a book
when I actually listened to someone else read it. I don’t
make a big deal out of it. But you asked for thoughts, and
that’s what I actually believe, even if I speak off-handedly
about reading audio books.
Evan
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking
about whether or not a person is able or not able to read
Braille. I wrote a blog post about this a while ago as
these were questions which I was considering and I'd like
to share this post with you if you have an interest in
reading it. I'm afraid that it really doesn't answer these
questions and, in fact, may raise a few additional ones
that some of us might not have considered. Here is the
post.
Consuming Books: Reading Vs.
Listening
This morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and
stumbled on a post from one of my friends who posed a
very interesting question. The question has to do with
the wording we use to convey how we consume audio books.
My friend pointed out that she’s noticing a trend, both
with blind and sighted readers, where they will use the
verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in “I just finished
listening to that book” as opposed to “I just finished
reading that book”, as if consuming a book via audio
isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First, I’ll provide a bit of background into my own
life as an avid reader. I learned how to read Braille
when I was around four and how to write it not much
later than that. I’ve always found reading Braille to be
very easy and I’ve been reading books using Braille for
about as long as I can remember. I remember the
enjoyment I always felt going to my school library,
browsing the many shelves of Braille books and being
able to check out one or two books a week, which I
always read quickly. Of course, there were many books,
known as talking books, which were recorded on
cassettes’ as well as on phonograph records. Talking
books have been available for blind and visually
impaired consumers to borrow since the 1930s, way before
audio books became popular with sighted consumers. While
I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape from my
library, Braille was always my preferred medium and,
when given a choice between Braille and audio, Braille
was always what I chose.
As I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume
books has also changed. Nearly all of the books which I
consume are done so audibly and not in Braille. There
are several reasons for this and they don’t apply to all
readers who are blind. First, most of the books which I
want to read are just not available in Braille. While
the National Library Service produces
many Braille books there are simply more titles
available in an audio format. Even then the amount of
books produced by NLS, while I greatly appreciate the
work that they do, is a drop in the bucket compared to
the amount of titles available from other suppliers. Bookshare, another
specialized library for people with print disabilities,
offers over half a million books and that number
continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35
years, offers around 80,000 human-narrated titles. Of
course, mainstream book suppliers such as the Kindle
store offer millions of books, with more constantly
being added. These specialized and mainstream suppliers
offer a much greater selection of books than what I am
able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some readers will no doubt want to remind me of the
fact that we do have Braille display technology, which
will work both with my computer as well as with my
phone. This is certainly true and a Braille display
would certainly allow me to read books from any of these
suppliers using the same Braille code that I enjoyed
using with books printed on paper. However, there are
reasons which, for me, make this an impractical
solution.
First, Braille display technology, while readily
available for many devices, is often costly. As an
example, Freedom Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille
display, the Focus 14 Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time
spending over a thousand dollars for a Braille display
is just not something which I could easily do,
considering it’s a device that I don’t truly need.
However, even if a Braille display magically dropped
onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading
either on the train or lying in bed. Reading with a
Braille display on a moving train, no matter how
portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in bed and
wanted to read a book it’s just so much easier to do
this with a small phone and would prove to be a bit less
convenient if I added even a 14-cell display.
Anyway, back to the topic. My friend was pointing out
that she has noticed that many people say they’ve
listened to a book as opposed to reading it if the book
was consumed in an audio medium, such as an audio CD or
listening to it with synthetic speech using the Kindle
app. However, this also makes me think of how we often
use the word “read” when we actually have listened to
the book.
This raises some interesting questions. When it comes
to books, is it fair to consider it reading regardless
of how it’s consumed? There are probably some sighted
people who feel that the only way to truly read a book
is to do so by processing the printed material visually.
Of course, as blind people we know this is certainly not
the case. All of us would agree that processing the
information with our fingers would just as validly be
considered reading as processing the information with
our eyes and, in that instance, there is no controversy.
However, the wording sometimes changes when we shift
from print on a page to either a human narrator or a
synthetic voice coming from a pair of speakers or from
our portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by
listening to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader,
am I wrong to say that I’ve read the book? Most blind
people would say that I’m not and I would tend to agree
with them.
However, let’s say we have an individual who is blind
who never learned how to read Braille. There are some
valid reasons for why they might not have been taught
how to read and write in Braille, such as having
neuropathy in their fingers which would prevent them
from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In such
a case, this blind individual would only be able to
consume books in an audible format. Considering this,
would we look at that blind person who didn’t know
Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves, that this
person was illiterate. We might not say that to their
face in the course of normal conversation but do we
consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then
can we say that this blind person, not knowing Braille,
has “read” a book when it was consumed by listening. If
we say no, then why is it acceptable for me to say that
I’ve read a book and my hypothetical blind person could
not say that, just because I can read Braille and he
cannot.
Let’s take this a step further and consider a fully
sighted person who, for one reason or another, never
learned how to read print. There’s no doubt that we
would conclude that this person would be considered
illiterate. Saying so is not meant as an insult but, in
this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t read is
illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have
the ability to learn Braille and the sighted person
could, with proper training, learn how to read print
but, until that individual chooses to take classes in
how to read, we would all agree that he’s illiterate.
Given that fact, would we tend to disagree with the
illiterate sighted person if he told us that he “read” a
particular book by consuming it in an audible medium?
Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t really read that
book, you listened to it.” If this is the case, then why
is it OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to
tell people that I may have read the same book by
consuming it in the exact same way but yet fewer people
would think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly, this isn’t the most important topic which
should concern us. I don’t think about it all that much
and it certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However, I
think these issues are important as it has really forced
me to think about what we mean when we speak of what it
means to be literate.
As an aside, the person who brought up this topic is
one of the proprietors of Speeddots, which
sells various tactile screen protectors for your Apple
iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth accessories as
well as rugged lightning cables with a life-time
warranty.
So, how do you feel about this? For you, does listening
to an audio book qualify as reading it? I’d love to hear
your thoughts in the comments.
David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron
Canazzi wrote:
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say you're a
good
Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who use
audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by
the way they write e-mails: is that what you're saying?
Well let me be your teacher and quote and correct your own
mistakes that you have made in your lengthy reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are trying to
say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition
of the first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille than
you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you
don't know/use/are competent in, Braille then you are not
truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails
from blind people who don't know braille there spelling
and (There should be a period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot
to be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are
misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I
don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There
should be a period after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to
audio. (there is a run on word toread that should be
separated into 'to read.')
Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read
than listen have only audio as the option all to often.
For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read
braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille.
(I guess you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille
most of my life and I would loose independence (I guess
you mean lose independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know braille.
(You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio
or computer speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but most
of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You
misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember
haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at
the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just
what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. (You
misspelled remember, having, across and probably mean the
word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you used
the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a
period after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing
Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college
back in 1987-1988 and I could have
<spelling error> donee much better if I had
braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe
blind but I had issues with the readers with
pronouncations. (you ran the words for and the
together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I remember taking test and what I heard during the test
sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made
<spelling error> sinse. (You misspelled the word
sense.)
<spelling error> If yur going to read on tape then
you must be able to speak properly and say your words
properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or at least I
think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only
tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book
to recording for the blind to be recorded. (I'm not quite
sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know
what you are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a
big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR EXAMPLE OF THE
IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY
CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES.
On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than
you are not truly literate. If you doubt this then read
emails from blind people who don't know braille there
spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then
I to will fall in to trap as well. If you truly want to
be literate then you just have toread and not just
listen to audio. Those of us who do prefer braille and
would rather read than listen have only audio as the
option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate
then I have to read braille and as I said in my email to
Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life with out braille. I
have had braille most of my life and I would loose
independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading
braille is active reading but listening to audio or
computer speech is just passive reading. I prefer to
activly read but most of the time I can't because it's
audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of
braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I
never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it
was no problem for me at all. The campus at the
Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan
covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in
1987-1988 and I could have donee much better if I had
braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I
remember taking test and what I heard during the test
sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes. If I
would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made sinse.
If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to
speak properly and say your words properly. There was
the issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2
copies of every book to recording for the blind to be
recorded. Audio is usless if I don't know what you are
saying. This is why we need braille. Braille readers
don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it
just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge
difference between not learning braille if you've lost
your site later in life. The unfortunate fact is that
even people who are blind since birth are not learning
braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50
years ago. If you are blind since birth and you don't
learn braille you miss out on basic literacy. How do
you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and
such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site
you already understand these things so knowing braille
isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@TechTalk.groups.io mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io
On Behalf Of Victor
Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM
To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose
their eyesight later in life and they find it too
difficult to learn braille. It is much easier for them
to access information by listening to audio. It’s hard
enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and
live without seeing their loved ones or other things
ever again. The last thing they want is to learn a new
skill that they may find just too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group
where are the people taught each other to use iOS
devices. While at the group one day, one of the group
leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable braille display
for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person
in the room interested in touching the device because
I knew braille and I owned a previous generation of
that device. It was not discussed, but I knew that
they were not interested because most of them had lost
their eyesight later in life. I suspect that they
found it much easier to listen to audio than reading
braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to access
information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found
it much easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to
their books, podcasts, scan documents and do
everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize
that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have
not found a way to obtain one. I also realize that not
everyone is into these types of gadgets. However, many
blind people have discovered how great these gadgets
are and how useful they can be in helping them become
more independent. For many of us, that is the route we
have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a
blind person who is not interested in learning
braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe they
just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist
now. I am also glad that low cost refreshable braille
displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss
the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from
my classes. I do not miss the days of trying to look
up words in the dictionary and dealing with a whole
bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not
miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display,
I would definitely look into obtaining the orbit
braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM,
brian mailto:bsackrider55@...
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I
would be willing to pay a few dollars to get
braille. I am not saying that I should get for free
but not to have the option is my complaint. My
local liberary use to provide braille for 10 cents
per page. I was also told that if I provided the
paper they would braille what I wanted. They
required 67 weight paper which I can get at
Staples. All to often we are forced to except only
audio as the only format that is available. Braille
will always be my prefered format because I prefer
to read for myself instead of just listen. You say
that you hate braille but you can use it well I feel
the same about audio. Why do we have to be locked in
to just one format? How many people would rather
read than listen? Blind or sighted. People who
prefer to read than should be commended instead of
being kind of bashed for it. If not many blind
people request braille than it should be no trouble
to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to
produce once you have the equipment. my liberary
had no trouble all they needed was files in
microsoft word and the paper and they were good to
go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my church
all in grade 2 braille. It was really great to
finally be an active participant in the service
instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read
along with everyone else the verses and hyms and
classes lessons is a great feeling you just can't
discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's
kind of like having access to dvs you can finally
know what is going on when there is all of that dead
air. I was able to read infront of the church and
be active in bible study and even lead the groop all
using braille. I do use braille menus when ever
possible even if I don't really need it just to let
them see that somone is acually using it. Braille
has given me a very full life and I don't know whear
my life would be with out braille. I feel that
every blind person who is able to read braille
should learn it. I do understand that there are
blind people who have medical conditions that
prevents them from being able to read braille. For
them they have no choice but to use audio but I do
have the choice I just don't like being limited to
just audio only and not braille. You hate braille
and I hate audio. a good example of when I wish
that I had braille instead of a file was when I
requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my
lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me
there was no braille manual but there was a print
manual. I had to go to the help file on the machine
and try to find what I wanted. When I called the
paper office they asked what files my machine could
read. If I had a braille manual I could have just
looked it up while on the phone and gave them the
answer. I had to call back after I went to the help
file and found it. This is very time concuming I
can look up somthing much faster in braille than any
other format. I am not saying that I can do it as
quick as a sighted person can with print but for me
it's the fastest way for me to get the job done.
When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the
blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all
of our books were in braille. There was no I don't
want to learn it you had to. I will say that I can
certainly listen much faster than I can read but
when it comes to looking up somthing braille is
faster hands down. I have been blind since birth
and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's like the
sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn the
opticon at the rehab center but they would not let
me because they said that I was not fast enough. I
felt that I was learning and making progress and I
should had the right to continue but they said no.
If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they
should beallowed to do so. If I am determind to
learn somthing that then I will even though it might
take more time then the teacher would like. I guess
that modavation means nothing. If somone reallly
wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several
month to do so they should not be told no you can't
continue. If companies had the equipment to produce
braille they could charge me for the cost of the
paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave
wrote:
Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the
hassle it is to create
it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there
were many times when I
would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio
format. many times have I had to just Wing it,
learning by Guess and
by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the
Blind, Guessing was
not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong
could ruin your
day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To
produce it is just not an
easy task. And I would guess that most
manufacturers of items for
the blind, may not want to hire another Staff
member to do nothing
but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing
such a thing is
considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF
format, if not an
Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer,
I can then print
out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so
I do without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an
Audio to Text
converter, and then print that file out in
Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I
need to go On Line
to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least
that much, but I
always look to see if I can just download the
manual so I don't need
to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over
and over again to
look for Work Arounds for doing many things in
Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate
it. So a Braille
Manual would be a waste of resources to send me
one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the
Company doesn't send
a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF,
or even Audio, if
you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is
to convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me,
and can't afford a
Braille Printer, there are Services that will take
your Manual file
and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all
part of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired
Readers to read
Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before
smart Phones had
built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them
$10 an hour too. this
was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years
now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So
often, regardless of
what Format it comes in, the information in the
thing is totally Nuts!
It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is
a Translation of
something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese
to Spanish and then
Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so
poorly written, lack
helpful information and seem to be missing a great
deal of actual
instructional information and are next to useless
in any format.
Grumpy Dave
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Hi Gene,
I have had an experience that is probably much different than many
other blind people. For background, it is important to state that I
was born a partial (partially sighted) but a very high functional
partial. I could ride a bicycle, play football and baseball with
fully sighted people, swim by myself, walk to and from school by
myself without sighted help and so on. Just before the age of
twelve, I lost my vision rather quickly--inn about two months.
Here I was totally blind at the age of twelve. So I wanted to learn
Braille very quickly. I had been an avid reader and I had a good
knowledge of spelling, punctuation and grammar--for a
twelve-year-old. Since for more than a year, I concentrated on
learning Braille, I put some of the other stuff aside and probably
fell behind my grade level for basics such as spelling, punctuation
and grammar. In addition, as Braille readers know, braille is full
of contractions, one letter word representations and so on. I
learned to read Braille fluently fairly quickly. In doing so, I was
able to continue to read more and more advanced books. But my
spelling, punctuation and grammar skills were--in a manner of
speaking--left behind. As time went on and I read more and more
complex books, my comprehension improved, but due to the issues of
transitioning from sighted print reader to blind Braille reader, my
spelling, punctuation and to a degree even grammar skills stayed a
lower levels.
Enter the digital, computer/Kindle/whatever age in the 1990's. I
began using a computer and all the other modern advances for the
blind and by using spell checkers, grammar checkers and the like, my
spelling, punctuation and grammar rapidly improved to college level
capabilities.
So you see, I had the exact opposite experience that some others
had--being blinded quickly, trying to compensate for that quickly,
falling behind and then using the modern, non Braille methodologies
to catch up to speed.
It just goes to show that people are people and that blind people
are people first--each with individual needs, strengths and
weaknesses--and blind secondarily.
On 3/6/2020 9:03 PM, Gene wrote:
You can't assume that what you are relating as your
experience is true in general and I very much doubt it. I don't
know if or why it is true for you. I learned xpelling and
punctuation from reading Braille. I may have learned other
things about how to write by reading Braille that I am unaware
of. But my literary skill in writing and in listening hasn't
gone down as I've read Braille less. I learned these skills.
When I listen, I employ the same skilss as when I read Braille.
When I write, I use the same skills I learned as I learned to
write. None of them are lessened by how little or how much I
read Braille.
When I was in school, I comprehended and interpreted what I
read as well whether I got the information from Braille or
print. In my later life, I lost none of my abilities to
comprehend and interpret as I read Braille less. There was a
time when I read a lot of Braille. I very seldom read much in
Braille now. But, as I said, my skills in comprehension,
interpretation, and writing have not gone down at all.
Thinking a little about history shows more inaccuracies in
your argument. People listened long before they read. the
Illiad and the Oddesey were in oral form long before they were
written down. Old myths and legends were in oral form long
before they were written.
You may prefer reading. You may concentrate better. I
concentrate and interpret what I read or what I listen to with
equal ability. And there is simply no loss of my skills as I've
read Braille less over the years.
Again, you are generalizing with no supporting evidence but
your own experience and that is just your experience. You
cannot build convincing arguments based on geneeralizing in
these areas just from you to the whole.
I am not saying that my experience is representative of most
people, but I think it is. But without studies of people to see
what we can determine, I don't claim what I'm saying as fact.
You have generalized throughout this discussion as though your
single personal experience is fact for all. It isn't, as I have
explained by relating my experience in this message.
Also, consider that the recorded book is now very popular
among sighted people. We are born listeners. Regardless of the
merits of reading, it came long after listening.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
If you get the writter magazine they will tell that if you
want to
be a good writter than you have to read alot. They are published
writters who make their living from their writting. For the
record I
have never claimed that my writting skills are any better than any
one
elses I did say that are not as they should be. This is because I
don't
read like I did in school. I am only blind I am not deaf blind.
I am
sure that I am not the only blind person whos writting skills are
not as
they should be. It is all because we don't access to paper
braille as
we should to keep our writting skills as they should be. wWhen
blind
people don't read their reading will suffer as I said that mine
does.
When people say that we don't braille because we have audio and
screen
readers they are not telling the truth. If you never read how
words are
spelled then you will sound try to guess how they are spelled by
sounding them out. As we all know not all words are spelled like
they
sound. This is a very big problem if you only listen. For
example if
you never read the word laugh in braille you might spell it laf
because
thats the way that it sounds. Why would have any reason to think
that
was wrong? You would think that that word must be spelled because
thats
they it sounds. You may say why don't you just use spell check.
If you
don't read then you would have no way of knowing that was the
wrong way
to spell the word. Another example is people say words not the
way that
should be said. All of my life I have always heard the word wash
pronounced as worsh so I would write it that way because I had no
reason
to question it. Once I read the word then I knew that it was
spelled
wash and not worsh. The way that people talk is very confusing to
blindpeople if you can't read for yourself. You may never know
that not
all words are spelled as they sound. If you did learn proper
spelling
back in school and you don't read you will forget how many words
are
spelled after many years of not reading. When I was in school my
teachers did not tell me that my writting skills were very bad
they
could be better and thats we are in school to learn and get our
skills
as they should be. If you don't use them then you will loose
them. I do
think that when I was in school my reading and writting was better
than
it is now because I had to do it every day. Now I don't have to.
I
have no problem with somone telling that I spelled a word wrong
and even
sighted people spell words wrong so it's not a blindness thing. No
one
is going to rember how every word is spelled any one can be wrong.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 4:45 PM, Ann Parsons wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I believe that Brian writes as well as he is able. Not sure
what his
> difficulties may be e.g. learning differences, DeafBlindness,
> whatever. Criticizing someone who is doing their best to
communicate
> is not productive. Pointing out errors, yes, privately, but
calling
> someone out for commenting on mistakes made by others when
he,
> himself, has made mistakes may feel good, but is, in my view,
> unproductive. That's what I was referring to, Gene.
>
> Sorry, I keep forgetting to quote stuff. This mailer doesn't
quote
> automatically.
>
> Ann P.
>
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
We don't see with our other senses. That's
just a way sighted people use to misunderstand blindness and to make themselves
feel more comfortable that we can't see. at least we see with our other
senses.
If someone says listened to or read a book when
they have listened to it, I don't care, but words mean something. Even if
people say read when they listened, they should not think
incorrectly and inaccurately. they should know for themselves what they
do. reading is something you do, whether with Braille or print or in some
other way. Listening to speech is a completely different
activity.
Gene
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
Hi David:
Thank you for your great blog post. It was thought-provoking.
Are usually tell people that I have read an audiobook even though I have
listened to it. It’s the same as telling people that I have seen a TV show or
watched it even though I have listened to it. Over the years, many sighted
people have asked me how I can watch TV without eyesight. I tell them that I use
that terminology because that’s what the sided world uses. Many sighted people
have said that we blind people see with our other senses. I guess that’s how we
can justify saying that we have read an audiobook. We see with our other senses.
Therefore, we read the material with our ears. Unless you speak Latin which is a
dead language, one has to get used to the fact that language changes all the
time. Therefore, using all of these words and terms interchangeably is not such
a big deal. At least not when it comes to this subject. Rush Limbaugh once said
that we are losing our language. He’s probably right.
In a perfect world, all blind people would know how to read braille and
they would benefit from it. However, that is not the case. All of the reasons
for learning and using braille mentioned in this thread are valid. But the
reasons for not doing so that have been mentioned here makes sense as well. So
much of it is just about personal preference and the circumstances of one’s
life. You do what you have to do, and you do what you want to do. In any case,
this whole discussion may be mute since the educational system is not really
teaching braille to blind people anyway. If that’s the case, braille advocates
will always fight an uphill battle. Again, the one thing that braille advocates
have in their favor is the emergence of low cost Braille displays.
JMO,
Victor
On Mar 6, 2020, at 6:06 PM, Evan Reese
<mentat1@...> wrote:
Well, I would say that listening to an audio book is not the same as
reading it, either in braille or print.
To illustrate, if I tell you a story, would you say that you had read it?
No. Now, what if I write down the story and read it to you, either in person
or on the phone. Would you say that you had read it? I don’t think so.
Now, suppose I make a recording of me reading the story and send it to
you. Would you say that you had read it? The only difference is that, instead
of reading it to you live, I’m reading it on tape, as we used to say.
So no, listening to someone read a book is not the same thing as reading
it oneself. You may still get the information, but you didn’t read it if you
listened to someone else read it.
I don’t think a synthetic voice makes any difference. True, it doesn’t
know what it’s saying, but you still have an intermediary between yourself and
the actual text, you’re still listening to (in this case), a computer
translate the actual text into words. So, even though it doesn’t comprehend
what it is translating, it is still reading to you in the strictest sense. You
are not reading when using a synthetic voice.
But language changes, definitions change over time. It may happen soon
that people will say that they are actually reading when they are listening to
a voice, any voice, whether human or synthetic, read to them. Many people
already say that, so I think we’re on the way. I don’t care all that much.
I’ve done it myself, said that I read a book when I actually listened to
someone else read it. I don’t make a big deal out of it. But you asked for
thoughts, and that’s what I actually believe, even if I speak off-handedly
about reading audio books.
Evan
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking about whether or
not a person is able or not able to read Braille. I wrote a blog post about
this a while ago as these were questions which I was considering and I'd like
to share this post with you if you have an interest in reading it. I'm afraid
that it really doesn't answer these questions and, in fact, may raise a few
additional ones that some of us might not have considered. Here is the
post.
Consuming Books: Reading Vs. Listening
This
morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and stumbled on a post from one of
my friends who posed a very interesting question. The question has to do with
the wording we use to convey how we consume audio books. My friend pointed out
that she’s noticing a trend, both with blind and sighted readers, where they
will use the verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in “I just finished listening
to that book” as opposed to “I just finished reading that book”, as if
consuming a book via audio isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First,
I’ll provide a bit of background into my own life as an avid reader. I learned
how to read Braille when I was around four and how to write it not much later
than that. I’ve always found reading Braille to be very easy and I’ve been
reading books using Braille for about as long as I can remember. I remember
the enjoyment I always felt going to my school library, browsing the many
shelves of Braille books and being able to check out one or two books a week,
which I always read quickly. Of course, there were many books, known as
talking books, which were recorded on cassettes’ as well as on phonograph
records. Talking books have been available for blind and visually impaired
consumers to borrow since the 1930s, way before audio books became popular
with sighted consumers. While I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape from
my library, Braille was always my preferred medium and, when given a choice
between Braille and audio, Braille was always what I chose.
As
I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume books has also changed.
Nearly all of the books which I consume are done so audibly and not in
Braille. There are several reasons for this and they don’t apply to all
readers who are blind. First, most of the books which I want to read are just
not available in Braille. While the National Library
Service produces many Braille books there are simply
more titles available in an audio format. Even then the amount of books
produced by NLS, while I greatly appreciate the work that they do, is a drop
in the bucket compared to the amount of titles available from other
suppliers. Bookshare, another specialized library
for people with print disabilities, offers over half a million books and that
number continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35 years, offers around
80,000 human-narrated titles. Of course, mainstream book suppliers such as the
Kindle store offer millions of books, with more constantly being added. These
specialized and mainstream suppliers offer a much greater selection of books
than what I am able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some
readers will no doubt want to remind me of the fact that we do have Braille
display technology, which will work both with my computer as well as with my
phone. This is certainly true and a Braille display would certainly allow me
to read books from any of these suppliers using the same Braille code that I
enjoyed using with books printed on paper. However, there are reasons which,
for me, make this an impractical solution.
First,
Braille display technology, while readily available for many devices, is often
costly. As an example, Freedom Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille display,
the Focus 14 Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time spending over a thousand
dollars for a Braille display is just not something which I could easily do,
considering it’s a device that I don’t truly need. However, even if a Braille
display magically dropped onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading
either on the train or lying in bed. Reading with a Braille display on a
moving train, no matter how portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in
bed and wanted to read a book it’s just so much easier to do this with a small
phone and would prove to be a bit less convenient if I added even a 14-cell
display.
Anyway,
back to the topic. My friend was pointing out that she has noticed that many
people say they’ve listened to a book as opposed to reading it if the book was
consumed in an audio medium, such as an audio CD or listening to it with
synthetic speech using the Kindle app. However, this also makes me think of
how we often use the word “read” when we actually have listened to the
book.
This
raises some interesting questions. When it comes to books, is it fair to
consider it reading regardless of how it’s consumed? There are probably some
sighted people who feel that the only way to truly read a book is to do so by
processing the printed material visually. Of course, as blind people we know
this is certainly not the case. All of us would agree that processing the
information with our fingers would just as validly be considered reading as
processing the information with our eyes and, in that instance, there is no
controversy. However, the wording sometimes changes when we shift from print
on a page to either a human narrator or a synthetic voice coming from a pair
of speakers or from our portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by
listening to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader, am I wrong to say that
I’ve read the book? Most blind people would say that I’m not and I would tend
to agree with them.
However,
let’s say we have an individual who is blind who never learned how to read
Braille. There are some valid reasons for why they might not have been taught
how to read and write in Braille, such as having neuropathy in their fingers
which would prevent them from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In
such a case, this blind individual would only be able to consume books in an
audible format. Considering this, would we look at that blind person who
didn’t know Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves, that this person was
illiterate. We might not say that to their face in the course of normal
conversation but do we consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then can we say that this
blind person, not knowing Braille, has “read” a book when it was consumed by
listening. If we say no, then why is it acceptable for me to say that I’ve
read a book and my hypothetical blind person could not say that, just because
I can read Braille and he cannot.
Let’s
take this a step further and consider a fully sighted person who, for one
reason or another, never learned how to read print. There’s no doubt that we
would conclude that this person would be considered illiterate. Saying so is
not meant as an insult but, in this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t
read is illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have the ability to
learn Braille and the sighted person could, with proper training, learn how to
read print but, until that individual chooses to take classes in how to read,
we would all agree that he’s illiterate. Given that fact, would we tend to
disagree with the illiterate sighted person if he told us that he “read” a
particular book by consuming it in an audible medium? Wouldn’t we think, “No,
you didn’t really read that book, you listened to it.” If this is the case,
then why is it OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to tell people
that I may have read the same book by consuming it in the exact same way but
yet fewer people would think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly,
this isn’t the most important topic which should concern us. I don’t think
about it all that much and it certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However,
I think these issues are important as it has really forced me to think about
what we mean when we speak of what it means to be literate.
As
an aside, the person who brought up this topic is one of the proprietors
of Speeddots, which sells various tactile
screen protectors for your Apple iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth
accessories as well as rugged lightning cables with a life-time warranty.
So,
how do you feel about this? For you, does listening to an audio book qualify
as reading it? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments. David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron Canazzi wrote:
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say
you're a good Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who
use audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they
write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your teacher
and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have made in your lengthy
reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you
are trying to say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition of
the first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't
braille than you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't
know/use/are competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from
blind people who don't know braille there spelling and (There should be a
period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and
punctuation leave alot to be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a
lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there
myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There
should be a period after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be
literate then you just have <spelling error> toread and not just
listen to audio. (there is a run on word toread that should be
separated into 'to read.') Those of us who do prefer braille and
would rather read than listen have only audio as the option all to often.
For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said
in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't <spelling error> amagine my
life with out braille. (I guess you mean 'imagine my life without
Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille
most of my life and I would loose independence (I guess you mean lose
independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know
braille. (You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading
braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just
passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but
most of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You misspelled
actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember
haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind school
but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no problem
for me at all. (You misspelled remember, having, across and
probably mean the word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you used
the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a period after
the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind
in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back
in 1987-1988 and I could have <spelling error> donee much better
if I had braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling
errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I had issues with the
readers with pronouncations. (you ran the words for and the
together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I remember taking
test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on
the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have
known the correct words and the tests would have made <spelling error>
sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling error>
If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say
your words properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or at
least I think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a
time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to
be recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape
at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know
what you are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a
book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR
EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY
CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES. On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than you are not truly
literate. If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't
know braille there spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will
fall in to trap as well. If you truly want to be literate then you
just have toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who
do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the
option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read
braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life
with out braille. I have had braille most of my life and I would
loose independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is
active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive
reading. I prefer to activly read but most of the time I can't
because it's audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of
braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a
though it was just what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all.
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan
covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I
could have donee much better if I had braille. I had tapes from
recording forthe blind but I had issues with the readers with
pronouncations. I remember taking test and what I heard during the
test sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes. If I would have
had my books in braille I would have known the correct words and the tests
would have made sinse. If yur going to read on tape then you must be
able to speak properly and say your words properly. There was the
issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book to
recording for the blind to be recorded. Audio is usless if I don't
know what you are saying. This is why we need braille. Braille
readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge difference between
not learning braille if you've lost your site later in life. The
unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind since birth are not
learning braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If
you are blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out on
basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation
and such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you already
understand these things so knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io
On Behalf Of Victor Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello
everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose
their eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn
braille. It is much easier for them to access information by listening
to audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over losing their eyesight
and live without seeing their loved ones or other things ever again. The
last thing they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just too
difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group
where are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the
group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable
braille display for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person in
the room interested in touching the device because I knew braille and I
owned a previous generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I
knew that they were not interested because most of them had lost their
eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it much easier to
listen to audio than reading braille. Plus, most of them had learned how
to access information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much
easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts,
scan documents and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I
realize that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not found
a way to obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is into these
types of gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how great
these gadgets are and how useful they can be in helping them become more
independent. For many of us, that is the route we have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person
who is not interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard on those
people. Maybe they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so
glad that refreshable braille displays exist now. I am also glad that
low cost refreshable braille displays are being developed. I definitely
don’t miss the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from my
classes. I do not miss the days of trying to look up words in the
dictionary and dealing with a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank
you! I do not miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I
did not already on a refreshable braille display, I would definitely
look into obtaining the orbit braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian mailto:bsackrider55@...
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your
explination. I would be willing to pay a few dollars to get
braille. I am not saying that I should get for free but not to have
the option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide
braille for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I
provided the paper they would braille what I wanted. They
required 67 weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to
often we are forced to except only audio as the only format that is
available. Braille will always be my prefered format because I prefer
to read for myself instead of just listen. You say that you hate
braille but you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we
have to be locked in to just one format? How many people would
rather read than listen? Blind or sighted. People who prefer to
read than should be commended instead of being kind of bashed for
it. If not many blind people request braille than it should be
no trouble to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once
you have the equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they
needed was files in microsoft word and the paper and they were good to
go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my church all in grade
2 braille. It was really great to finally be an active participant in
the service instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read
along with everyone else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a
great feeling you just can't discribe the independence that it
givesyou. It's kind of like having access to dvs you can finally
know what is going on when there is all of that dead air. I was
able to read infront of the church and be active in bible study and
even lead the groop all using braille. I do use braille menus
when ever possible even if I don't really need it just to let them see
that somone is acually using it. Braille has given me a very
full life and I don't know whear my life would be with out
braille. I feel that every blind person who is able to read
braille should learn it. I do understand that there are blind
people who have medical conditions that prevents them from being able
to read braille. For them they have no choice but to use audio
but I do have the choice I just don't like being limited to just audio
only and not braille. You hate braille and I hate audio. a
good example of when I wish that I had braille instead of a file was
when I requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my lions
club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no braille
manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to the help
file on the machine and try to find what I wanted. When I called
the paper office they asked what files my machine could read. If
I had a braille manual I could have just looked it up while on the
phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back after I went
to the help file and found it. This is very time concuming I can
look up somthing much faster in braille than any other format. I
am not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted person can with
print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the job
done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the blind
in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books were in
braille. There was no I don't want to learn it you had to.
I will say that I can certainly listen much faster than I can read but
when it comes to looking up somthing braille is faster hands
down. I have been blind since birth and thats all I ever knew
was braille. It's like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted
to learn the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me
because they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I was
learning and making progress and I should had the right to continue
but they said no. If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they
should beallowed to do so. If I am determind to learn somthing
that then I will even though it might take more time then the teacher
would like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If
somone reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month
to do so they should not be told no you can't continue. If
companies had the equipment to produce braille they could charge me
for the cost of the paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote: Hello
Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the
hassle it is to create it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many
times when I would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio format. many times have I had to just Wing
it, learning by Guess and by Golly. Once Computers became
a Tool for the Blind, Guessing was not always the best thing to
do, as guessing wrong could ruin your day in a Big way.
Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with
Braille. To produce it is just not an easy
task. And I would guess that most manufacturers of items for
the blind, may not want to hire another Staff member to do
nothing but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it
all sounds good, until the costs of doing such a thing is
considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at
least in a PDF format, if not an Audio file. And if I own
my own Braille Printer, I can then print out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I do
without.
However, I could run the Audio file
through an Audio to Text converter, and then print that file out
in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual,
where I need to go On Line to read the thing. I am
Thankful for at least that much, but I always look to see if I
can just download the manual so I don't need to be going On Line
so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would
think most who are Blind have learned over and over again to
look for Work Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate
it. So a Braille Manual would be a waste of resources to
send me one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So,
when the Company doesn't send a manual in Braille, but has sent
you one in PDF, or even Audio, if you want a manual in Braille,
the Work around is to convert that Audio or PDF file into
Braille. And if you are like me, and can't afford a
Braille Printer, there are Services that will take your Manual
file and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost
you a few dollars, which again is all part of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers to
read Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my
Mail. This was before smart Phones had built in Cameras
and OCR programs. I paid them $10 an hour too. this
was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to
hire anyone for about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up
the Quality of Manuals? So often, regardless of what
Format it comes in, the information in the thing is totally Nuts!
It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is a Translation
of something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese to Spanish
and then Russian, and then to English etc.
And some
manuals that come in English are so poorly written, lack
helpful information and seem to be missing a great deal of
actual instructional information and are next to useless in any
format.
Grumpy Dave
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
jan howells <gale7978@...>
Those who are braille advocates will appreciate the Braille Revival League in Philadelphia. It is at 919 Walnut Street. That is Associated Services for the Blind. They keep braille alive as best they can so that it never dies. Enjoy!
Jan
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Hi David:
Thank you for your great blog post. It was thought-provoking.
Are usually tell people that I have read an audiobook even though I have listened to it. It’s the same as telling people that I have seen a TV show or watched it even though I have listened to it. Over the years, many sighted people have asked me how I can watch TV without eyesight. I tell them that I use that terminology because that’s what the sided world uses. Many sighted people have said that we blind people see with our other senses. I guess that’s how we can justify saying that we have read an audiobook. We see with our other senses. Therefore, we read the material with our ears. Unless you speak Latin which is a dead language, one has to get used to the fact that language changes all the time. Therefore, using all of these words and terms interchangeably is not such a big deal. At least not when it comes to this subject. Rush Limbaugh once said that we are losing our language. He’s probably right.
In a perfect world, all blind people would know how to read braille and they would benefit from it. However, that is not the case. All of the reasons for learning and using braille mentioned in this thread are valid. But the reasons for not doing so that have been mentioned here makes sense as well. So much of it is just about personal preference and the circumstances of one’s life. You do what you have to do, and you do what you want to do. In any case, this whole discussion may be mute since the educational system is not really teaching braille to blind people anyway. If that’s the case, braille advocates will always fight an uphill battle. Again, the one thing that braille advocates have in their favor is the emergence of low cost Braille displays.
JMO,
Victor
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Mar 6, 2020, at 6:06 PM, Evan Reese <mentat1@...> wrote:
Well, I would say that listening to an audio book is not the same as
reading it, either in braille or print.
To illustrate, if I tell you a story, would you say that you had read it?
No. Now, what if I write down the story and read it to you, either in person or
on the phone. Would you say that you had read it? I don’t think so.
Now, suppose I make a recording of me reading the story and send it to you.
Would you say that you had read it? The only difference is that, instead of
reading it to you live, I’m reading it on tape, as we used to say.
So no, listening to someone read a book is not the same thing as reading it
oneself. You may still get the information, but you didn’t read it if you
listened to someone else read it.
I don’t think a synthetic voice makes any difference. True, it doesn’t know
what it’s saying, but you still have an intermediary between yourself and the
actual text, you’re still listening to (in this case), a computer translate the
actual text into words. So, even though it doesn’t comprehend what it is
translating, it is still reading to you in the strictest sense. You are not
reading when using a synthetic voice.
But language changes, definitions change over time. It may happen soon that
people will say that they are actually reading when they are listening to a
voice, any voice, whether human or synthetic, read to them. Many people already
say that, so I think we’re on the way. I don’t care all that much. I’ve done it
myself, said that I read a book when I actually listened to someone else read
it. I don’t make a big deal out of it. But you asked for thoughts, and that’s
what I actually believe, even if I speak off-handedly about reading audio
books.
Evan
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking about whether or not
a person is able or not able to read Braille. I wrote a blog post about this a
while ago as these were questions which I was considering and I'd like to share
this post with you if you have an interest in reading it. I'm afraid that it
really doesn't answer these questions and, in fact, may raise a few additional
ones that some of us might not have considered. Here is the post.
Consuming
Books: Reading Vs. Listening
This
morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and stumbled on a post from one of
my friends who posed a very interesting question. The question has to do with
the wording we use to convey how we consume audio books. My friend pointed out
that she’s noticing a trend, both with blind and sighted readers, where they
will use the verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in “I just finished listening
to that book” as opposed to “I just finished reading that book”, as if consuming
a book via audio isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First,
I’ll provide a bit of background into my own life as an avid reader. I learned
how to read Braille when I was around four and how to write it not much later
than that. I’ve always found reading Braille to be very easy and I’ve been
reading books using Braille for about as long as I can remember. I remember the
enjoyment I always felt going to my school library, browsing the many shelves of
Braille books and being able to check out one or two books a week, which I
always read quickly. Of course, there were many books, known as talking books,
which were recorded on cassettes’ as well as on phonograph records. Talking
books have been available for blind and visually impaired consumers to borrow
since the 1930s, way before audio books became popular with sighted consumers.
While I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape from my library, Braille was
always my preferred medium and, when given a choice between Braille and audio,
Braille was always what I chose.
As
I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume books has also changed. Nearly
all of the books which I consume are done so audibly and not in Braille. There
are several reasons for this and they don’t apply to all readers who are blind.
First, most of the books which I want to read are just not available in Braille.
While the National Library
Service produces many Braille books there are simply more
titles available in an audio format. Even then the amount of books produced by
NLS, while I greatly appreciate the work that they do, is a drop in the bucket
compared to the amount of titles available from other
suppliers. Bookshare, another specialized library for
people with print disabilities, offers over half a million books and that number
continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35 years, offers around
80,000 human-narrated titles. Of course, mainstream book suppliers such as the
Kindle store offer millions of books, with more constantly being added. These
specialized and mainstream suppliers offer a much greater selection of books
than what I am able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some
readers will no doubt want to remind me of the fact that we do have Braille
display technology, which will work both with my computer as well as with my
phone. This is certainly true and a Braille display would certainly allow me to
read books from any of these suppliers using the same Braille code that I
enjoyed using with books printed on paper. However, there are reasons which, for
me, make this an impractical solution.
First,
Braille display technology, while readily available for many devices, is often
costly. As an example, Freedom Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille display,
the Focus 14 Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time spending over a thousand dollars
for a Braille display is just not something which I could easily do, considering
it’s a device that I don’t truly need. However, even if a Braille display
magically dropped onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading either on
the train or lying in bed. Reading with a Braille display on a moving train, no
matter how portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in bed and wanted to
read a book it’s just so much easier to do this with a small phone and would
prove to be a bit less convenient if I added even a 14-cell display.
Anyway,
back to the topic. My friend was pointing out that she has noticed that many
people say they’ve listened to a book as opposed to reading it if the book was
consumed in an audio medium, such as an audio CD or listening to it with
synthetic speech using the Kindle app. However, this also makes me think of how
we often use the word “read” when we actually have listened to the book.
This
raises some interesting questions. When it comes to books, is it fair to
consider it reading regardless of how it’s consumed? There are probably some
sighted people who feel that the only way to truly read a book is to do so by
processing the printed material visually. Of course, as blind people we know
this is certainly not the case. All of us would agree that processing the
information with our fingers would just as validly be considered reading as
processing the information with our eyes and, in that instance, there is no
controversy. However, the wording sometimes changes when we shift from print on
a page to either a human narrator or a synthetic voice coming from a pair of
speakers or from our portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by
listening to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader, am I wrong to say that
I’ve read the book? Most blind people would say that I’m not and I would tend to
agree with them.
However,
let’s say we have an individual who is blind who never learned how to read
Braille. There are some valid reasons for why they might not have been taught
how to read and write in Braille, such as having neuropathy in their fingers
which would prevent them from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In
such a case, this blind individual would only be able to consume books in an
audible format. Considering this, would we look at that blind person who didn’t
know Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves, that this person was
illiterate. We might not say that to their face in the course of normal
conversation but do we consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then can we say that this
blind person, not knowing Braille, has “read” a book when it was consumed by
listening. If we say no, then why is it acceptable for me to say that I’ve read
a book and my hypothetical blind person could not say that, just because I can
read Braille and he cannot.
Let’s
take this a step further and consider a fully sighted person who, for one reason
or another, never learned how to read print. There’s no doubt that we would
conclude that this person would be considered illiterate. Saying so is not meant
as an insult but, in this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t read is
illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have the ability to learn
Braille and the sighted person could, with proper training, learn how to read
print but, until that individual chooses to take classes in how to read, we
would all agree that he’s illiterate. Given that fact, would we tend to disagree
with the illiterate sighted person if he told us that he “read” a particular
book by consuming it in an audible medium? Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t
really read that book, you listened to it.” If this is the case, then why is it
OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to tell people that I may have
read the same book by consuming it in the exact same way but yet fewer people
would think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly,
this isn’t the most important topic which should concern us. I don’t think about
it all that much and it certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However, I think
these issues are important as it has really forced me to think about what we
mean when we speak of what it means to be literate.
As
an aside, the person who brought up this topic is one of the proprietors
of Speeddots, which sells various tactile
screen protectors for your Apple iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth
accessories as well as rugged lightning cables with a life-time warranty.
So,
how do you feel about this? For you, does listening to an audio book qualify as
reading it? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments. David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron Canazzi wrote:
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say
you're a good Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who
use audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they
write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your teacher
and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have made in your lengthy
reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are
trying to say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition of the
first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille
than you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't know/use/are
competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on
sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't
know braille there spelling and (There should be a period after the word
Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot to
be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I don't read then
I to will fall in to trap as well. (There should be a period after the
word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to audio. (there
is a run on word toread that should be separated into 'to read.') Those of
us who do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only
audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I
have to read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille. (I guess
you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word
loose> I have had braille most of my life and I would loose independence (I
guess you mean lose independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to
not know braille. (You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer
speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error>
activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You
misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I
do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind
school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no
problem for me at all. (You misspelled remember, having, across
and probably mean the word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you
used the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a period
after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the
blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college
back in 1987-1988 and I could have <spelling error> donee much
better if I had braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. (you ran the
words for and the together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I
remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like
what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I
would have known the correct words and the tests would have made <spelling
error> sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling
error> If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly
and say your words properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or
at least I think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a time
and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be
recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape at a
time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know what you
are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a
book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR
EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY
CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES. On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than you are not truly
literate. If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't
know braille there spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will fall
in to trap as well. If you truly want to be literate then you just
have toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who do
prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the
option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read
braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life
with out braille. I have had braille most of my life and I would loose
independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is active
reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive
reading. I prefer to activly read but most of the time I can't because
it's audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books
acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just
what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. The campus at the
Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block
area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I could have donee much
better if I had braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I remember taking
test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on
the tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made sinse. If yur going to
read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say your words
properly. There was the issue of only tape at a time and having to
send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be recorded.
Audio is usless if I don't know what you are saying. This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a
book is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM,
chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge difference between
not learning braille if you've lost your site later in life. The
unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind since birth are not
learning braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If
you are blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out on
basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and
such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you already
understand these things so knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io
On Behalf Of Victor Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello
everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose
their eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn
braille. It is much easier for them to access information by listening to
audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and
live without seeing their loved ones or other things ever again. The last
thing they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just too
difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group
where are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the
group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable
braille display for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person in
the room interested in touching the device because I knew braille and I
owned a previous generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I
knew that they were not interested because most of them had lost their
eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it much easier to listen
to audio than reading braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to
access information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much easier
to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts, scan
documents and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize
that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not found a way to
obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is into these types of
gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how great these
gadgets are and how useful they can be in helping them become more
independent. For many of us, that is the route we have chosen.
In
any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person who is not
interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe
they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that
refreshable braille displays exist now. I am also glad that low cost
refreshable braille displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss
the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from my classes. I do not
miss the days of trying to look up words in the dictionary and dealing
with a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not miss my
five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a
refreshable braille display, I would definitely look into obtaining the
orbit braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just
my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian mailto:bsackrider55@...
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your
explination. I would be willing to pay a few dollars to get
braille. I am not saying that I should get for free but not to have the
option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide braille
for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I provided
the paper they would braille what I wanted. They required 67
weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to often we are
forced to except only audio as the only format that is available.
Braille will always be my prefered format because I prefer to read for
myself instead of just listen. You say that you hate braille but
you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we have to be
locked in to just one format? How many people would rather read
than listen? Blind or sighted. People who prefer to read than
should be commended instead of being kind of bashed for it. If not
many blind people request braille than it should be no trouble to
provide it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once you have the
equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they needed was files in
microsoft word and the paper and they were good to go. I use to
get my weekly meterials for my church all in grade 2 braille. It was
really great to finally be an active participant in the service instead
just a pasive listener. To be able to read along with everyone
else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a great feeling you just
can't discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's kind of
like having access to dvs you can finally know what is going on when
there is all of that dead air. I was able to read infront of the
church and be active in bible study and even lead the groop all using
braille. I do use braille menus when ever possible even if I don't
really need it just to let them see that somone is acually using
it. Braille has given me a very full life and I don't know whear
my life would be with out braille. I feel that every blind person
who is able to read braille should learn it. I do understand that
there are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents them
from being able to read braille. For them they have no choice but
to use audio but I do have the choice I just don't like being limited to
just audio only and not braille. You hate braille and I hate
audio. a good example of when I wish that I had braille instead of
a file was when I requested my local newspaper to be accessable.
my lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no
braille manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to the
help file on the machine and try to find what I wanted. When I
called the paper office they asked what files my machine could
read. If I had a braille manual I could have just looked it up
while on the phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back
after I went to the help file and found it. This is very time
concuming I can look up somthing much faster in braille than any other
format. I am not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted
person can with print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the
job done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the
blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books were
in braille. There was no I don't want to learn it you had
to. I will say that I can certainly listen much faster than I can
read but when it comes to looking up somthing braille is faster hands
down. I have been blind since birth and thats all I ever knew was
braille. It's like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to
learn the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me because
they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I was learning
and making progress and I should had the right to continue but they said
no. If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they should
beallowed to do so. If I am determind to learn somthing that then
I will even though it might take more time then the teacher would
like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If somone
reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month to do so
they should not be told no you can't continue. If companies had
the equipment to produce braille they could charge me for the cost of
the paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote: Hello
Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the
hassle it is to create it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many
times when I would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio format. many times have I had to just Wing
it, learning by Guess and by Golly. Once Computers became a
Tool for the Blind, Guessing was not always the best thing to do,
as guessing wrong could ruin your day in a Big way. Still
can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille.
To produce it is just not an easy task. And I would guess
that most manufacturers of items for the blind, may not want to
hire another Staff member to do nothing but print out Manuals in
Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing
such a thing is considered.
These days, I do expect a
Manual at least in a PDF format, if not an Audio file. And
if I own my own Braille Printer, I can then print out the PDF
file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I
do without.
However, I could run the Audio file
through an Audio to Text converter, and then print that file out
in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual,
where I need to go On Line to read the thing. I am Thankful
for at least that much, but I always look to see if I can just
download the manual so I don't need to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most
who are Blind have learned over and over again to look for Work
Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille,
and while I do use it, I Hate it. So a Braille Manual would
be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and
can use it well. So, when the Company doesn't send a manual
in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or even Audio, if you
want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and
can't afford a Braille Printer, there are Services that will take
your Manual file and make you a manual in Braille.
it
may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers to
read Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail.
This was before smart Phones had built in Cameras and OCR
programs. I paid them $10 an hour too. this was back
in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for
about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of
Manuals? So often, regardless of what Format it comes in,
the information in the thing is totally Nuts! It doesn't make
Sense, and you can't tell if it is a Translation of something in
Chinese to English, or from Chinese to Spanish and then Russian,
and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in
English are so poorly written, lack helpful information and
seem to be missing a great deal of actual instructional
information and are next to useless in any format.
Grumpy
Dave
|
|
thank you Gene. I’m saving this and did find how to get the back off.
dave
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
From: Gene
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 6:36 PM
To: main@TechTalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] alka tell V phone
I have the Alcatel Go Flip 3 phone. the phone
is a phone that is more or less accessible but it is not a specialized phone for
blind people. therefor, you must turn speech on.
Your phone may be the same or similar to mine but I don't
know that. My phone has a very tiny slot between the back and the rest of
the case on a part of the case away from the hinge. Turn your phone so
that the hinge is facing you and so that the back of the phone, the part with
the tiny speaker is facing up. there may be a very small slot at the right
corner of the phone now, the right corner farthest away from you. Your
fingernail may be able to open it.
It doesn't sound to me as though
your sighted helped used the manual or used it properly. I'm sure the
manual has a section on opening the back with some sort of picture or
diagram.
As far as speech is concerned,
you may find how to turn it on by opening settings, then right arrowing four
times , up arrowing two times to accessibility, pressing enter, up arrowing
seven times to readout, then turning it on. Instead of writing every step,
I'll say for now that the sighted person helpting you may well see what to do
even without all these instructions, I'll give more details if
needed. You open settings by pressing the big button in the middle of the
almost round area and you up arrow five times, then press enter. I doubt a
sighted person would need all these instructions about how many times to up
arrow. I would theink that pressing the big button will show a menu on
screen and that settings will be one of the items.
These are descriptions and
information that apply to my phone. They may not apply or fully
apply to yours.
Gene
----- Original Message
-----
From: Dave Mitchel
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 7:50 PM
To: main@TechTalk.groups.io
Subject: [TechTalk] alka tell V phone
Hello, I just received my new alka tell V phone and I can’t even figure out
how to get the battery installed. does anyone know the trick to opening up the
back so I can install the battery?
once installed will it come up speaking to me or do I need to figure out
how to do that also?
my sighted helper could not figure out the trick to opening the back either
so I don’t feel too awfully bad.
any help will be appreciated.
Dave
|
|
Re: Dear Ann, Control 8 work Great, Thanks!
Please stop changing the subject line of the message thread everytime you reply to a message.
Thanks,
Laz List moderator
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 3/6/20, Alan <adicey415@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Ann, Control 8 work Great, Thanks!
With best regards. God Bless. Alan Plantation, Sunny South Florida ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ann Parsons" <akp@sero.email> To: <main@techtalk.groups.io> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2020 4:56 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Dear Ann, That worked, but now it says "New Line" How do I shut that off in my Word 2007 using JAWS 13
Hi,
Try just ctrl-8
Ann P.
Original message:
Dear Ann and friends, That worked, but now it says "New Line" How do I shut that off in my Word 2007 using JAWS 13 With best regards. God Bless. Alan Plantation, Sunny South Florida ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ann Parsons" <akp@sero.email> To: <main@techtalk.groups.io> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2020 2:14 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Dear Friends, How do I shut Paragraph Marking off
in my Word 2007 using JAWS 13
Hi all,
Try ctrl-shift-8 to shut off the paragraph announcements.
Ann P.
-- Ann K. Parsons Portal Tutoring EMAIL: akp@sero.email Author of The Demmies: http://www.dldbooks.com/annparsons/ Portal Tutoring web site: http://www.portaltutoring.info Skype: Putertutor
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost."
-- Ann K. Parsons Portal Tutoring EMAIL: akp@sero.email Author of The Demmies: http://www.dldbooks.com/annparsons/ Portal Tutoring web site: http://www.portaltutoring.info Skype: Putertutor
"All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost."
|
|
I have the Alcatel Go Flip 3 phone. the phone
is a phone that is more or less accessible but it is not a specialized phone for
blind people. therefor, you must turn speech on.
Your phone may be the same or similar to mine but I don't
know that. My phone has a very tiny slot between the back and the rest of
the case on a part of the case away from the hinge. Turn your phone so
that the hinge is facing you and so that the back of the phone, the part with
the tiny speaker is facing up. there may be a very small slot at the right
corner of the phone now, the right corner farthest away from you. Your
fingernail may be able to open it.
It doesn't sound to me as though
your sighted helped used the manual or used it properly. I'm sure the
manual has a section on opening the back with some sort of picture or
diagram.
As far as speech is concerned,
you may find how to turn it on by opening settings, then right arrowing four
times , up arrowing two times to accessibility, pressing enter, up arrowing
seven times to readout, then turning it on. Instead of writing every step,
I'll say for now that the sighted person helpting you may well see what to do
even without all these instructions, I'll give more details if
needed. You open settings by pressing the big button in the middle of the
almost round area and you up arrow five times, then press enter. I doubt a
sighted person would need all these instructions about how many times to up
arrow. I would theink that pressing the big button will show a menu on
screen and that settings will be one of the items.
These are descriptions and
information that apply to my phone. They may not apply or fully
apply to yours.
Gene
----- Original Message
-----
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 7:50 PM
Subject: [TechTalk] alka tell V phone
Hello, I just received my new alka tell V phone and I can’t even figure out
how to get the battery installed. does anyone know the trick to opening up the
back so I can install the battery?
once installed will it come up speaking to me or do I need to figure out
how to do that also?
my sighted helper could not figure out the trick to opening the back either
so I don’t feel too awfully bad.
any help will be appreciated.
Dave
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Well, I would say that listening to an audio book is not the same as
reading it, either in braille or print.
To illustrate, if I tell you a story, would you say that you had read it?
No. Now, what if I write down the story and read it to you, either in person or
on the phone. Would you say that you had read it? I don’t think so.
Now, suppose I make a recording of me reading the story and send it to you.
Would you say that you had read it? The only difference is that, instead of
reading it to you live, I’m reading it on tape, as we used to say.
So no, listening to someone read a book is not the same thing as reading it
oneself. You may still get the information, but you didn’t read it if you
listened to someone else read it.
I don’t think a synthetic voice makes any difference. True, it doesn’t know
what it’s saying, but you still have an intermediary between yourself and the
actual text, you’re still listening to (in this case), a computer translate the
actual text into words. So, even though it doesn’t comprehend what it is
translating, it is still reading to you in the strictest sense. You are not
reading when using a synthetic voice.
But language changes, definitions change over time. It may happen soon that
people will say that they are actually reading when they are listening to a
voice, any voice, whether human or synthetic, read to them. Many people already
say that, so I think we’re on the way. I don’t care all that much. I’ve done it
myself, said that I read a book when I actually listened to someone else read
it. I don’t make a big deal out of it. But you asked for thoughts, and that’s
what I actually believe, even if I speak off-handedly about reading audio
books.
Evan
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking about whether or not
a person is able or not able to read Braille. I wrote a blog post about this a
while ago as these were questions which I was considering and I'd like to share
this post with you if you have an interest in reading it. I'm afraid that it
really doesn't answer these questions and, in fact, may raise a few additional
ones that some of us might not have considered. Here is the post.
Consuming
Books: Reading Vs. Listening
This
morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and stumbled on a post from one of
my friends who posed a very interesting question. The question has to do with
the wording we use to convey how we consume audio books. My friend pointed out
that she’s noticing a trend, both with blind and sighted readers, where they
will use the verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in “I just finished listening
to that book” as opposed to “I just finished reading that book”, as if consuming
a book via audio isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First,
I’ll provide a bit of background into my own life as an avid reader. I learned
how to read Braille when I was around four and how to write it not much later
than that. I’ve always found reading Braille to be very easy and I’ve been
reading books using Braille for about as long as I can remember. I remember the
enjoyment I always felt going to my school library, browsing the many shelves of
Braille books and being able to check out one or two books a week, which I
always read quickly. Of course, there were many books, known as talking books,
which were recorded on cassettes’ as well as on phonograph records. Talking
books have been available for blind and visually impaired consumers to borrow
since the 1930s, way before audio books became popular with sighted consumers.
While I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape from my library, Braille was
always my preferred medium and, when given a choice between Braille and audio,
Braille was always what I chose.
As
I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume books has also changed. Nearly
all of the books which I consume are done so audibly and not in Braille. There
are several reasons for this and they don’t apply to all readers who are blind.
First, most of the books which I want to read are just not available in Braille.
While the National Library
Service produces many Braille books there are simply more
titles available in an audio format. Even then the amount of books produced by
NLS, while I greatly appreciate the work that they do, is a drop in the bucket
compared to the amount of titles available from other
suppliers. Bookshare, another specialized library for
people with print disabilities, offers over half a million books and that number
continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35 years, offers around
80,000 human-narrated titles. Of course, mainstream book suppliers such as the
Kindle store offer millions of books, with more constantly being added. These
specialized and mainstream suppliers offer a much greater selection of books
than what I am able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some
readers will no doubt want to remind me of the fact that we do have Braille
display technology, which will work both with my computer as well as with my
phone. This is certainly true and a Braille display would certainly allow me to
read books from any of these suppliers using the same Braille code that I
enjoyed using with books printed on paper. However, there are reasons which, for
me, make this an impractical solution.
First,
Braille display technology, while readily available for many devices, is often
costly. As an example, Freedom Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille display,
the Focus 14 Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time spending over a thousand dollars
for a Braille display is just not something which I could easily do, considering
it’s a device that I don’t truly need. However, even if a Braille display
magically dropped onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading either on
the train or lying in bed. Reading with a Braille display on a moving train, no
matter how portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in bed and wanted to
read a book it’s just so much easier to do this with a small phone and would
prove to be a bit less convenient if I added even a 14-cell display.
Anyway,
back to the topic. My friend was pointing out that she has noticed that many
people say they’ve listened to a book as opposed to reading it if the book was
consumed in an audio medium, such as an audio CD or listening to it with
synthetic speech using the Kindle app. However, this also makes me think of how
we often use the word “read” when we actually have listened to the book.
This
raises some interesting questions. When it comes to books, is it fair to
consider it reading regardless of how it’s consumed? There are probably some
sighted people who feel that the only way to truly read a book is to do so by
processing the printed material visually. Of course, as blind people we know
this is certainly not the case. All of us would agree that processing the
information with our fingers would just as validly be considered reading as
processing the information with our eyes and, in that instance, there is no
controversy. However, the wording sometimes changes when we shift from print on
a page to either a human narrator or a synthetic voice coming from a pair of
speakers or from our portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by
listening to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader, am I wrong to say that
I’ve read the book? Most blind people would say that I’m not and I would tend to
agree with them.
However,
let’s say we have an individual who is blind who never learned how to read
Braille. There are some valid reasons for why they might not have been taught
how to read and write in Braille, such as having neuropathy in their fingers
which would prevent them from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In
such a case, this blind individual would only be able to consume books in an
audible format. Considering this, would we look at that blind person who didn’t
know Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves, that this person was
illiterate. We might not say that to their face in the course of normal
conversation but do we consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then can we say that this
blind person, not knowing Braille, has “read” a book when it was consumed by
listening. If we say no, then why is it acceptable for me to say that I’ve read
a book and my hypothetical blind person could not say that, just because I can
read Braille and he cannot.
Let’s
take this a step further and consider a fully sighted person who, for one reason
or another, never learned how to read print. There’s no doubt that we would
conclude that this person would be considered illiterate. Saying so is not meant
as an insult but, in this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t read is
illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have the ability to learn
Braille and the sighted person could, with proper training, learn how to read
print but, until that individual chooses to take classes in how to read, we
would all agree that he’s illiterate. Given that fact, would we tend to disagree
with the illiterate sighted person if he told us that he “read” a particular
book by consuming it in an audible medium? Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t
really read that book, you listened to it.” If this is the case, then why is it
OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to tell people that I may have
read the same book by consuming it in the exact same way but yet fewer people
would think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly,
this isn’t the most important topic which should concern us. I don’t think about
it all that much and it certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However, I think
these issues are important as it has really forced me to think about what we
mean when we speak of what it means to be literate.
As
an aside, the person who brought up this topic is one of the proprietors
of Speeddots, which sells various tactile
screen protectors for your Apple iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth
accessories as well as rugged lightning cables with a life-time warranty.
So,
how do you feel about this? For you, does listening to an audio book qualify as
reading it? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments. David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron Canazzi wrote:
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say
you're a good Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who
use audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they
write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your teacher
and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have made in your lengthy
reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are
trying to say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition of the
first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille
than you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't know/use/are
competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on
sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't
know braille there spelling and (There should be a period after the word
Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot to
be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I don't read then
I to will fall in to trap as well. (There should be a period after the
word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to audio. (there
is a run on word toread that should be separated into 'to read.') Those of
us who do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only
audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I
have to read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille. (I guess
you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word
loose> I have had braille most of my life and I would loose independence (I
guess you mean lose independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to
not know braille. (You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer
speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error>
activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You
misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I
do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind
school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no
problem for me at all. (You misspelled remember, having, across
and probably mean the word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you
used the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a period
after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the
blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college
back in 1987-1988 and I could have <spelling error> donee much
better if I had braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. (you ran the
words for and the together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I
remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like
what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I
would have known the correct words and the tests would have made <spelling
error> sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling
error> If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly
and say your words properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or
at least I think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a time
and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be
recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape at a
time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know what you
are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a
book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR
EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY
CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES. On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than you are not truly
literate. If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't
know braille there spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will fall
in to trap as well. If you truly want to be literate then you just
have toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who do
prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the
option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read
braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life
with out braille. I have had braille most of my life and I would loose
independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is active
reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive
reading. I prefer to activly read but most of the time I can't because
it's audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books
acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just
what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. The campus at the
Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block
area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I could have donee much
better if I had braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I
had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I remember taking
test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on
the tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would have known
the correct words and the tests would have made sinse. If yur going to
read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say your words
properly. There was the issue of only tape at a time and having to
send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be recorded.
Audio is usless if I don't know what you are saying. This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a
book is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM,
chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge difference between
not learning braille if you've lost your site later in life. The
unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind since birth are not
learning braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If
you are blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out on
basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and
such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you already
understand these things so knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io
On Behalf Of Victor Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello
everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose
their eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn
braille. It is much easier for them to access information by listening to
audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and
live without seeing their loved ones or other things ever again. The last
thing they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just too
difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group
where are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the
group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable
braille display for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person in
the room interested in touching the device because I knew braille and I
owned a previous generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I
knew that they were not interested because most of them had lost their
eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it much easier to listen
to audio than reading braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to
access information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much easier
to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts, scan
documents and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize
that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not found a way to
obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is into these types of
gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how great these
gadgets are and how useful they can be in helping them become more
independent. For many of us, that is the route we have chosen.
In
any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person who is not
interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe
they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that
refreshable braille displays exist now. I am also glad that low cost
refreshable braille displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss
the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from my classes. I do not
miss the days of trying to look up words in the dictionary and dealing
with a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not miss my
five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a
refreshable braille display, I would definitely look into obtaining the
orbit braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just
my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian mailto:bsackrider55@...
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your
explination. I would be willing to pay a few dollars to get
braille. I am not saying that I should get for free but not to have the
option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide braille
for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I provided
the paper they would braille what I wanted. They required 67
weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to often we are
forced to except only audio as the only format that is available.
Braille will always be my prefered format because I prefer to read for
myself instead of just listen. You say that you hate braille but
you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we have to be
locked in to just one format? How many people would rather read
than listen? Blind or sighted. People who prefer to read than
should be commended instead of being kind of bashed for it. If not
many blind people request braille than it should be no trouble to
provide it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once you have the
equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they needed was files in
microsoft word and the paper and they were good to go. I use to
get my weekly meterials for my church all in grade 2 braille. It was
really great to finally be an active participant in the service instead
just a pasive listener. To be able to read along with everyone
else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a great feeling you just
can't discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's kind of
like having access to dvs you can finally know what is going on when
there is all of that dead air. I was able to read infront of the
church and be active in bible study and even lead the groop all using
braille. I do use braille menus when ever possible even if I don't
really need it just to let them see that somone is acually using
it. Braille has given me a very full life and I don't know whear
my life would be with out braille. I feel that every blind person
who is able to read braille should learn it. I do understand that
there are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents them
from being able to read braille. For them they have no choice but
to use audio but I do have the choice I just don't like being limited to
just audio only and not braille. You hate braille and I hate
audio. a good example of when I wish that I had braille instead of
a file was when I requested my local newspaper to be accessable.
my lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no
braille manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to the
help file on the machine and try to find what I wanted. When I
called the paper office they asked what files my machine could
read. If I had a braille manual I could have just looked it up
while on the phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back
after I went to the help file and found it. This is very time
concuming I can look up somthing much faster in braille than any other
format. I am not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted
person can with print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the
job done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the
blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books were
in braille. There was no I don't want to learn it you had
to. I will say that I can certainly listen much faster than I can
read but when it comes to looking up somthing braille is faster hands
down. I have been blind since birth and thats all I ever knew was
braille. It's like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to
learn the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me because
they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I was learning
and making progress and I should had the right to continue but they said
no. If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they should
beallowed to do so. If I am determind to learn somthing that then
I will even though it might take more time then the teacher would
like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If somone
reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month to do so
they should not be told no you can't continue. If companies had
the equipment to produce braille they could charge me for the cost of
the paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote: Hello
Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the
hassle it is to create it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many
times when I would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio format. many times have I had to just Wing
it, learning by Guess and by Golly. Once Computers became a
Tool for the Blind, Guessing was not always the best thing to do,
as guessing wrong could ruin your day in a Big way. Still
can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille.
To produce it is just not an easy task. And I would guess
that most manufacturers of items for the blind, may not want to
hire another Staff member to do nothing but print out Manuals in
Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing
such a thing is considered.
These days, I do expect a
Manual at least in a PDF format, if not an Audio file. And
if I own my own Braille Printer, I can then print out the PDF
file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I
do without.
However, I could run the Audio file
through an Audio to Text converter, and then print that file out
in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual,
where I need to go On Line to read the thing. I am Thankful
for at least that much, but I always look to see if I can just
download the manual so I don't need to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most
who are Blind have learned over and over again to look for Work
Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille,
and while I do use it, I Hate it. So a Braille Manual would
be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and
can use it well. So, when the Company doesn't send a manual
in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or even Audio, if you
want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and
can't afford a Braille Printer, there are Services that will take
your Manual file and make you a manual in Braille.
it
may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers to
read Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail.
This was before smart Phones had built in Cameras and OCR
programs. I paid them $10 an hour too. this was back
in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for
about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of
Manuals? So often, regardless of what Format it comes in,
the information in the thing is totally Nuts! It doesn't make
Sense, and you can't tell if it is a Translation of something in
Chinese to English, or from Chinese to Spanish and then Russian,
and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in
English are so poorly written, lack helpful information and
seem to be missing a great deal of actual instructional
information and are next to useless in any format.
Grumpy
Dave
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
You can't assume that what you are relating as your
experience is true in general and I very much doubt it. I don't know if or
why it is true for you. I learned xpelling and punctuation from reading
Braille. I may have learned other things about how to write by reading
Braille that I am unaware of. But my literary skill in writing and in
listening hasn't gone down as I've read Braille less. I learned these
skills. When I listen, I employ the same skilss as when I read
Braille. When I write, I use the same skills I learned as I learned to
write. None of them are lessened by how little or how much I read
Braille.
When I was in school, I comprehended and
interpreted what I read as well whether I got the information from Braille or
print. In my later life, I lost none of my abilities to comprehend and
interpret as I read Braille less. There was a time when I read a lot of
Braille. I very seldom read much in Braille now. But, as I said, my
skills in comprehension, interpretation, and writing have not gone down at
all.
Thinking a little about history shows more
inaccuracies in your argument. People listened long before they
read. the Illiad and the Oddesey were in oral form long before they were
written down. Old myths and legends were in oral form long before they
were written.
You may prefer reading. You may concentrate
better. I concentrate and interpret what I read or what I listen to with
equal ability. And there is simply no loss of my skills as I've read
Braille less over the years.
Again, you are generalizing with no supporting
evidence but your own experience and that is just your experience. You
cannot build convincing arguments based on geneeralizing in these areas just
from you to the whole.
I am not saying that my experience is
representative of most people, but I think it is. But without studies of
people to see what we can determine, I don't claim what I'm saying as
fact. You have generalized throughout this discussion as though your
single personal experience is fact for all. It isn't, as I have explained
by relating my experience in this message.
Also, consider that the recorded book is now very
popular among sighted people. We are born listeners. Regardless of
the merits of reading, it came long after listening.
Gene
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2020 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing
business
If you get the writter magazine they will tell
that if you want to be a good writter than you have to read alot. They
are published writters who make their living from their writting. For
the record I have never claimed that my writting skills are any better than
any one elses I did say that are not as they should be. This is
because I don't read like I did in school. I am only blind I am not
deaf blind. I am sure that I am not the only blind person whos
writting skills are not as they should be. It is all because we don't
access to paper braille as we should to keep our writting skills as they
should be. wWhen blind people don't read their reading will suffer as
I said that mine does. When people say that we don't braille because
we have audio and screen readers they are not telling the truth. If
you never read how words are spelled then you will sound try to guess how
they are spelled by sounding them out. As we all know not all words
are spelled like they sound. This is a very big problem if you only
listen. For example if you never read the word laugh in braille you
might spell it laf because thats the way that it sounds. Why would
have any reason to think that was wrong? You would think that that
word must be spelled because thats they it sounds. You may say why
don't you just use spell check. If you don't read then you would have
no way of knowing that was the wrong way to spell the word. Another
example is people say words not the way that should be said. All of my
life I have always heard the word wash pronounced as worsh so I would write
it that way because I had no reason to question it. Once I read the
word then I knew that it was spelled wash and not worsh. The way that
people talk is very confusing to blindpeople if you can't read for
yourself. You may never know that not all words are spelled as they
sound. If you did learn proper spelling back in school and you don't
read you will forget how many words are spelled after many years of not
reading. When I was in school my teachers did not tell me that my
writting skills were very bad they could be better and thats we are in
school to learn and get our skills as they should be. If you don't use
them then you will loose them. I do think that when I was in school my
reading and writting was better than it is now because I had to do it every
day. Now I don't have to. I have no problem with somone telling
that I spelled a word wrong and even sighted people spell words wrong so
it's not a blindness thing. No one is going to rember how every word is
spelled any one can be wrong. Brian Sackrider On 3/6/2020 4:45 PM,
Ann Parsons wrote: > Hi all, > > I believe that Brian writes
as well as he is able. Not sure what his > difficulties may be e.g.
learning differences, DeafBlindness, > whatever. Criticizing someone who
is doing their best to communicate > is not productive. Pointing
out errors, yes, privately, but calling > someone out for commenting on
mistakes made by others when he, > himself, has made mistakes may feel
good, but is, in my view, > unproductive. That's what I was
referring to, Gene. > > Sorry, I keep forgetting to quote
stuff. This mailer doesn't quote > automatically. > >
Ann P. >
|
|
Hello, I just received my new alka tell V phone and I can’t even figure out
how to get the battery installed. does anyone know the trick to opening up the
back so I can install the battery?
once installed will it come up speaking to me or do I need to figure out
how to do that also?
my sighted helper could not figure out the trick to opening the back either
so I don’t feel too awfully bad.
any help will be appreciated.
Dave
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Hi David,
I agree with most of what your blog post stated. There is one thing
that seems to be lost during this thread. Just because someone can
read print/Braille/special formatted audio presentations doesn't
mean they are literate. From the early 20th century, people:
sighted/blind/whatever have been given reading comprehension tests
to see if what they are seeing/hearing/whatever is really
comprehended.
In other words, just because a person has eyes and can read a print
book or because he can read a braille book that is no guarantee that
she/he understands what they are reading.
Long story short: there's a lot more to reading then just mouthing
printed words out loud, or listening to an audio book via any number
of methods. Discussing what you read with others who have also read
the text--by whatever mean--would be the true indicator of whether
or not someone is truly literate.
On 3/6/2020 6:58 PM, David Goldfield
wrote:
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking about
whether or not a person is able or not able to read Braille. I
wrote a blog post about this a while ago as these were questions
which I was considering and I'd like to share this post with you
if you have an interest in reading it. I'm afraid that it really
doesn't answer these questions and, in fact, may raise a few
additional ones that some of us might not have considered. Here
is the post.
Consuming Books: Reading Vs. Listening
This morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and stumbled
on a post from one of my friends who posed a very interesting
question. The question has to do with the wording we use to
convey how we consume audio books. My friend pointed out that
she’s noticing a trend, both with blind and sighted readers,
where they will use the verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in
“I just finished listening to that book” as opposed to “I just
finished reading that book”, as if consuming a book via audio
isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First, I’ll provide a bit of background into my own life as
an avid reader. I learned how to read Braille when I was
around four and how to write it not much later than that. I’ve
always found reading Braille to be very easy and I’ve been
reading books using Braille for about as long as I can
remember. I remember the enjoyment I always felt going to my
school library, browsing the many shelves of Braille books and
being able to check out one or two books a week, which I
always read quickly. Of course, there were many books, known
as talking books, which were recorded on cassettes’ as well as
on phonograph records. Talking books have been available for
blind and visually impaired consumers to borrow since the
1930s, way before audio books became popular with sighted
consumers. While I never hesitated to borrow a book on tape
from my library, Braille was always my preferred medium and,
when given a choice between Braille and audio, Braille was
always what I chose.
As I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume books has
also changed. Nearly all of the books which I consume are done
so audibly and not in Braille. There are several reasons for
this and they don’t apply to all readers who are blind. First,
most of the books which I want to read are just not available
in Braille. While the National
Library Service produces many Braille books
there are simply more titles available in an audio format.
Even then the amount of books produced by NLS, while I greatly
appreciate the work that they do, is a drop in the bucket
compared to the amount of titles available from other
suppliers. Bookshare, another specialized
library for people with print disabilities, offers over half a
million books and that number continues to increase. Learning
Ally is another specialized library which
I’ve used for over 35 years, offers around 80,000
human-narrated titles. Of course, mainstream book suppliers
such as the Kindle store offer millions of books, with more
constantly being added. These specialized and mainstream
suppliers offer a much greater selection of books than what I
am able to borrow from my local NLS affiliate.
Some readers will no doubt want to remind me of the fact that
we do have Braille display technology, which will work both
with my computer as well as with my phone. This is certainly
true and a Braille display would certainly allow me to read
books from any of these suppliers using the same Braille code
that I enjoyed using with books printed on paper. However,
there are reasons which, for me, make this an impractical
solution.
First, Braille display technology, while readily available
for many devices, is often costly. As an example, Freedom
Scientific’s most inexpensive Braille display, the Focus 14
Blue, costs $1295.00. At this time spending over a thousand
dollars for a Braille display is just not something which I
could easily do, considering it’s a device that I don’t truly
need. However, even if a Braille display magically dropped
onto my desk the fact is that I do a lot of reading either on
the train or lying in bed. Reading with a Braille display on a
moving train, no matter how portable, is just too awkward.
When I’m lying in bed and wanted to read a book it’s just so
much easier to do this with a small phone and would prove to
be a bit less convenient if I added even a 14-cell display.
Anyway, back to the topic. My friend was pointing out that
she has noticed that many people say they’ve listened to a
book as opposed to reading it if the book was consumed in an
audio medium, such as an audio CD or listening to it with
synthetic speech using the Kindle app. However, this also
makes me think of how we often use the word “read” when we
actually have listened to the book.
This raises some interesting questions. When it comes to
books, is it fair to consider it reading regardless of how
it’s consumed? There are probably some sighted people who feel
that the only way to truly read a book is to do so by
processing the printed material visually. Of course, as blind
people we know this is certainly not the case. All of us would
agree that processing the information with our fingers would
just as validly be considered reading as processing the
information with our eyes and, in that instance, there is no
controversy. However, the wording sometimes changes when we
shift from print on a page to either a human narrator or a
synthetic voice coming from a pair of speakers or from our
portable phones and tablets. If I consumed a book by listening
to it with an app such as Voice Dream Reader, am I wrong to
say that I’ve read the book? Most blind people would say that
I’m not and I would tend to agree with them.
However, let’s say we have an individual who is blind who
never learned how to read Braille. There are some valid
reasons for why they might not have been taught how to read
and write in Braille, such as having neuropathy in their
fingers which would prevent them from being able to
distinguish the dot patterns. In such a case, this blind
individual would only be able to consume books in an audible
format. Considering this, would we look at that blind person
who didn’t know Braille and conclude, if only to ourselves,
that this person was illiterate. We might not say that to
their face in the course of normal conversation but do we
consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then can we
say that this blind person, not knowing Braille, has “read” a
book when it was consumed by listening. If we say no, then why
is it acceptable for me to say that I’ve read a book and my
hypothetical blind person could not say that, just because I
can read Braille and he cannot.
Let’s take this a step further and consider a fully sighted
person who, for one reason or another, never learned how to
read print. There’s no doubt that we would conclude that this
person would be considered illiterate. Saying so is not meant
as an insult but, in this case, is indisputable; someone who
can’t read is illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might
not have the ability to learn Braille and the sighted person
could, with proper training, learn how to read print but,
until that individual chooses to take classes in how to read,
we would all agree that he’s illiterate. Given that fact,
would we tend to disagree with the illiterate sighted person
if he told us that he “read” a particular book by consuming it
in an audible medium? Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t
really read that book, you listened to it.” If this is the
case, then why is it OK for me, as a blind person who knows
Braille, to tell people that I may have read the same book by
consuming it in the exact same way but yet fewer people would
think of challenging my word choices.
Admittedly, this isn’t the most important topic which should
concern us. I don’t think about it all that much and it
certainly doesn’t keep me up at night. However, I think these
issues are important as it has really forced me to think about
what we mean when we speak of what it means to be literate.
As an aside, the person who brought up this topic is one of
the proprietors of Speeddots, which
sells various tactile screen protectors for your Apple
iDevice. They also sell various Bluetooth accessories as well
as rugged lightning cables with a life-time warranty.
So, how do you feel about this? For you, does listening to an
audio book qualify as reading it? I’d love to hear your
thoughts in the comments.
David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron Canazzi
wrote:
Now
Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say you're a good
Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who use audio
primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they
write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your
teacher and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have
made in your lengthy reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are trying to say
Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition of the
first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille than you are
not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't know/use/are
competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from
blind people who don't know braille there spelling and (There
should be a period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I don't read
then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There should be a
period after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to audio.
(there is a run on word toread that should be separated into 'to
read.')
Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read than
listen have only audio as the option all to often. For me if I
want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said
in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille. (I
guess you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille most of
my life and I would loose independence (I guess you mean lose
independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know braille. (You ran
the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or
computer speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but most of the
time I can't because it's audio only. (You misspelled
actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember
haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the
blind school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav
to do it was no problem for me at all. (You misspelled
remember, having, across and probably mean the word had when you
wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you used the word though instead
of thought.) (There should be a period after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing
Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in
1987-1988 and I could have
<spelling error> donee much better if I had braille. (You
misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind
but I had issues with the readers with pronouncations. (you
ran the words for and the together. You misspelled
pronunciation.)
I remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded
nothing like what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have known the
correct words and the tests would have made <spelling
error> sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling error> If yur going to read on tape then you
must be able to speak properly and say your words properly.
(You misspelled the word you're--or at least I think that's what
you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a
time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for
the blind to be recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you
meant 'only one tape at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know what you
are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a big
deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT
BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY CORRECT E-MAIL
MESSAGES.
On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than you are
not truly literate. If you doubt this then read emails from
blind people who don't know braille there spelling and gramar
and punctuation leave alot to be desired. I have been there
myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as
well. If you truly want to be literate then you just have
toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who do
prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only
audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay
literate then I have to read braille and as I said in my email
to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life with out braille. I
have had braille most of my life and I would loose
independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is
active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is
just passive reading. I prefer to activly read but most of
the time I can't because it's audio only. I do rember haveing
to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind
school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to
do it was no problem for me at all. The campus at the
Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4
city block area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I
could have donee much better if I had braille. I had tapes
from recording forthe blind but I had issues with the readers
with pronouncations. I remember taking test and what I heard
during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on the
tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would have
known the correct words and the tests would have made sinse.
If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak
properly and say your words properly. There was the issue of
only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book
to recording for the blind to be recorded. Audio is usless if
I don't know what you are saying. This is why we need
braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many
volumes a book is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge
difference between not learning braille if you've lost your
site later in life. The unfortunate fact is that even people
who are blind since birth are not learning braille at the
rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If you are
blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out
on basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling,
grammar, punctuation and such if you don't learn braile. If
you have had site you already understand these things so
knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Victor
Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM
To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose their
eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to
learn braille. It is much easier for them to access
information by listening to audio. It’s hard enough for them
to get over losing their eyesight and live without seeing
their loved ones or other things ever again. The last thing
they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just
too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group where
are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While
at the group one day, one of the group leaders brought a
focus 40 refreshable braille display for everyone to
examine. I was the only blind person in the room interested
in touching the device because I knew braille and I owned a
previous generation of that device. It was not discussed,
but I knew that they were not interested because most of
them had lost their eyesight later in life. I suspect that
they found it much easier to listen to audio than reading
braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to access
information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much
easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books,
podcasts, scan documents and do everything else we can do
with our iPhones. I realize that not everyone owns a smart
phone because they have not found a way to obtain one. I
also realize that not everyone is into these types of
gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how
great these gadgets are and how useful they can be in
helping them become more independent. For many of us, that
is the route we have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind
person who is not interested in learning braille. Don’t be
too hard on those people. Maybe they just prefer to do what
is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist now. I
am also glad that low cost refreshable braille displays are
being developed. I definitely don’t miss the days of
carrying bulky braille books to and from my classes. I do
not miss the days of trying to look up words in the
dictionary and dealing with a whole bookshelf of braille
books. No thank you! I do not miss my five volume braille
New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display, I
would definitely look into obtaining the orbit braille
reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian <bsackrider55@...>
wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I would be
willing to pay a few dollars to get braille. I am not
saying that I should get for free but not to have the
option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide
braille for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I
provided the paper they would braille what I wanted. They
required 67 weight paper which I can get at Staples. All
to often we are forced to except only audio as the only
format that is available. Braille will always be my
prefered format because I prefer to read for myself
instead of just listen. You say that you hate braille but
you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we
have to be locked in to just one format? How many people
would rather read than listen? Blind or sighted. People
who prefer to read than should be commended instead of
being kind of bashed for it. If not many blind people
request braille than it should be no trouble to provide
it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once you have
the equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they needed
was files in microsoft word and the paper and they were
good to go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my
church all in grade 2 braille. It was really great to
finally be an active participant in the service instead
just a pasive listener. To be able to read along with
everyone else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a
great feeling you just can't discribe the independence
that it givesyou. It's kind of like having access to dvs
you can finally know what is going on when there is all of
that dead air. I was able to read infront of the church
and be active in bible study and even lead the groop all
using braille. I do use braille menus when ever possible
even if I don't really need it just to let them see that
somone is acually using it. Braille has given me a very
full life and I don't know whear my life would be with out
braille. I feel that every blind person who is able to
read braille should learn it. I do understand that there
are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents
them from being able to read braille. For them they have
no choice but to use audio but I do have the choice I just
don't like being limited to just audio only and not
braille. You hate braille and I hate audio. a good
example of when I wish that I had braille instead of a
file was when I requested my local newspaper to be
accessable. my lions club purchassed a sara reading
machine for me there was no braille manual but there was a
print manual. I had to go to the help file on the machine
and try to find what I wanted. When I called the paper
office they asked what files my machine could read. If I
had a braille manual I could have just looked it up while
on the phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back
after I went to the help file and found it. This is very
time concuming I can look up somthing much faster in
braille than any other format. I am not saying that I can
do it as quick as a sighted person can with print but for
me it's the fastest way for me to get the job done. When
I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the blind in
Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books
were in braille. There was no I don't want to learn it
you had to. I will say that I can certainly listen much
faster than I can read but when it comes to looking up
somthing braille is faster hands down. I have been blind
since birth and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's
like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn
the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me
because they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that
I was learning and making progress and I should had the
right to continue but they said no. If somone really wants
to learn a new skil then they should beallowed to do so.
If I am determind to learn somthing that then I will even
though it might take more time then the teacher would
like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If somone
reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several
month to do so they should not be told no you can't
continue. If companies had the equipment to produce
braille they could charge me for the cost of the paper to
get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote:
Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the hassle it
is to create
it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many
times when I
would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a
manual in Audio
format. many times have I had to just Wing it, learning
by Guess and
by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the Blind,
Guessing was
not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong could
ruin your
day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To produce it
is just not an
easy task. And I would guess that most manufacturers of
items for
the blind, may not want to hire another Staff member to
do nothing
but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing such a
thing is
considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF
format, if not an
Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer, I can
then print
out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I do
without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an Audio to
Text
converter, and then print that file out in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I need
to go On Line
to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least that
much, but I
always look to see if I can just download the manual so
I don't need
to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over and
over again to
look for Work Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate it. So
a Braille
Manual would be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the Company
doesn't send
a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or
even Audio, if
you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to
convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and
can't afford a
Braille Printer, there are Services that will take your
Manual file
and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part
of the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers
to read
Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of
Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before smart
Phones had
built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them $10 an
hour too. this
was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So often,
regardless of
what Format it comes in, the information in the thing is
totally Nuts!
It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is a
Translation of
something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese to
Spanish and then
Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so poorly
written, lack
helpful information and seem to be missing a great deal
of actual
instructional information and are next to useless in any
format.
Grumpy Dave
--
They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes.
They ask: "How Happy are You?"
I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
Re: Accessible mainstream electronic games?
Hi I can’t think of anyother main stream accessible games. As far as Xbox the only thing on that successful is the menus the games themselves generally are not accessible hth
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Mar 6, 2020, at 5:08 PM, Sharon Hooley <shooley42@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I'm thinking about buying at least one electronic game from Amazon. I know that Say What and Boppit are accessible, but are there others? Also, I haven't been really interested in XBox, so I haven't been paying attention to messages on that topic. So are there any games that are already accessible? Thanks,
Is it hard to communicate, even with hearing aids? Visit www.CochlearAmericas.com
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
David Goldfield <david.goldfield@...>
I'd like to address this topic of literacy when talking about
whether or not a person is able or not able to read Braille. I
wrote a blog post about this a while ago as these were questions
which I was considering and I'd like to share this post with you
if you have an interest in reading it. I'm afraid that it really
doesn't answer these questions and, in fact, may raise a few
additional ones that some of us might not have considered. Here is
the post.
Consuming Books: Reading
Vs. Listening
This
morning I was browsing my Facebook timeline and stumbled on a
post from one of my friends who posed a very interesting
question. The question has to do with the wording we use to
convey how we consume audio books. My friend pointed out that
she’s noticing a trend, both with blind and sighted readers,
where they will use the verb “listen” instead of “read”, as in
“I just finished listening to that book” as opposed to “I just
finished reading that book”, as if consuming a book via audio
isn’t quite the same as reading it.
First,
I’ll provide a bit of background into my own life as an avid
reader. I learned how to read Braille when I was around four and
how to write it not much later than that. I’ve always found
reading Braille to be very easy and I’ve been reading books
using Braille for about as long as I can remember. I remember
the enjoyment I always felt going to my school library, browsing
the many shelves of Braille books and being able to check out
one or two books a week, which I always read quickly. Of course,
there were many books, known as talking books, which were
recorded on cassettes’ as well as on phonograph records. Talking
books have been available for blind and visually impaired
consumers to borrow since the 1930s, way before audio books
became popular with sighted consumers. While I never hesitated
to borrow a book on tape from my library, Braille was always my
preferred medium and, when given a choice between Braille and
audio, Braille was always what I chose.
As
I’ve embraced new technologies the way I consume books has also
changed. Nearly all of the books which I consume are done so
audibly and not in Braille. There are several reasons for this
and they don’t apply to all readers who are blind. First, most
of the books which I want to read are just not available in
Braille. While the National Library
Service produces many Braille books there are
simply more titles available in an audio format. Even then the
amount of books produced by NLS, while I greatly appreciate the
work that they do, is a drop in the bucket compared to the
amount of titles available from other suppliers. Bookshare, another specialized
library for people with print disabilities, offers over half a
million books and that number continues to increase. Learning Ally is
another specialized library which I’ve used for over 35 years,
offers around 80,000 human-narrated titles. Of course,
mainstream book suppliers such as the Kindle store offer
millions of books, with more constantly being added. These
specialized and mainstream suppliers offer a much greater
selection of books than what I am able to borrow from my local
NLS affiliate.
Some
readers will no doubt want to remind me of the fact that we do
have Braille display technology, which will work both with my
computer as well as with my phone. This is certainly true and a
Braille display would certainly allow me to read books from any
of these suppliers using the same Braille code that I enjoyed
using with books printed on paper. However, there are reasons
which, for me, make this an impractical solution.
First,
Braille display technology, while readily available for many
devices, is often costly. As an example, Freedom Scientific’s
most inexpensive Braille display, the Focus 14 Blue, costs
$1295.00. At this time spending over a thousand dollars for a
Braille display is just not something which I could easily do,
considering it’s a device that I don’t truly need. However, even
if a Braille display magically dropped onto my desk the fact is
that I do a lot of reading either on the train or lying in bed.
Reading with a Braille display on a moving train, no matter how
portable, is just too awkward. When I’m lying in bed and wanted
to read a book it’s just so much easier to do this with a small
phone and would prove to be a bit less convenient if I added
even a 14-cell display.
Anyway,
back to the topic. My friend was pointing out that she has
noticed that many people say they’ve listened to a book as
opposed to reading it if the book was consumed in an audio
medium, such as an audio CD or listening to it with synthetic
speech using the Kindle app. However, this also makes me think
of how we often use the word “read” when we actually have
listened to the book.
This
raises some interesting questions. When it comes to books, is it
fair to consider it reading regardless of how it’s consumed?
There are probably some sighted people who feel that the only
way to truly read a book is to do so by processing the printed
material visually. Of course, as blind people we know this is
certainly not the case. All of us would agree that processing
the information with our fingers would just as validly be
considered reading as processing the information with our eyes
and, in that instance, there is no controversy. However, the
wording sometimes changes when we shift from print on a page to
either a human narrator or a synthetic voice coming from a pair
of speakers or from our portable phones and tablets. If I
consumed a book by listening to it with an app such as Voice
Dream Reader, am I wrong to say that I’ve read the book? Most
blind people would say that I’m not and I would tend to agree
with them.
However,
let’s say we have an individual who is blind who never learned
how to read Braille. There are some valid reasons for why they
might not have been taught how to read and write in Braille,
such as having neuropathy in their fingers which would prevent
them from being able to distinguish the dot patterns. In such a
case, this blind individual would only be able to consume books
in an audible format. Considering this, would we look at that
blind person who didn’t know Braille and conclude, if only to
ourselves, that this person was illiterate. We might not say
that to their face in the course of normal conversation but do
we consider a blind person who doesn’t know Braille to be
illiterate? If the answer to that question is yes then can we
say that this blind person, not knowing Braille, has “read” a
book when it was consumed by listening. If we say no, then why
is it acceptable for me to say that I’ve read a book and my
hypothetical blind person could not say that, just because I can
read Braille and he cannot.
Let’s
take this a step further and consider a fully sighted person
who, for one reason or another, never learned how to read print.
There’s no doubt that we would conclude that this person would
be considered illiterate. Saying so is not meant as an insult
but, in this case, is indisputable; someone who can’t read is
illiterate. My hypothetical blind person might not have the
ability to learn Braille and the sighted person could, with
proper training, learn how to read print but, until that
individual chooses to take classes in how to read, we would all
agree that he’s illiterate. Given that fact, would we tend to
disagree with the illiterate sighted person if he told us that
he “read” a particular book by consuming it in an audible
medium? Wouldn’t we think, “No, you didn’t really read that
book, you listened to it.” If this is the case, then why is it
OK for me, as a blind person who knows Braille, to tell people
that I may have read the same book by consuming it in the exact
same way but yet fewer people would think of challenging my word
choices.
Admittedly,
this isn’t the most important topic which should concern us. I
don’t think about it all that much and it certainly doesn’t keep
me up at night. However, I think these issues are important as
it has really forced me to think about what we mean when we
speak of what it means to be literate.
As
an aside, the person who brought up this topic is one of the
proprietors of Speeddots, which
sells various tactile screen protectors for your Apple iDevice.
They also sell various Bluetooth accessories as well as rugged
lightning cables with a life-time warranty.
So,
how do you feel about this? For you, does listening to an audio
book qualify as reading it? I’d love to hear your thoughts in
the comments.
David Goldfield,
Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist
JAWS Certified, 2019
WWW.DavidGoldfield.org
On 3/6/2020 6:21 PM, Ron Canazzi wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Now
Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say you're a good
Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who use audio
primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they
write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your
teacher and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have made
in your lengthy reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are trying to say Amen
to that or something similar--note the repetition of the first
letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille than you are
not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't know/use/are
competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from
blind people who don't know braille there spelling and (There
should be a period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot to be
desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I don't read
then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There should be a period
after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have
<spelling error> toread and not just listen to audio.
(there is a run on word toread that should be separated into 'to
read.')
Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read than
listen have only audio as the option all to often. For me if I
want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said in
my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
<spelling error> amagine my life with out braille. (I guess
you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille most of my
life and I would loose independence (I guess you mean lose
independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know braille. (You ran
the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or
computer speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but most of the
time I can't because it's audio only. (You misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember haveing
to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind school
but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was
no problem for me at all. (You misspelled remember, having,
across and probably mean the word had when you wrote hav. And I
almost forgot, you used the word though instead of thought.)
(There should be a period after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing
Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in
1987-1988 and I could have
<spelling error> donee much better if I had braille. (You
misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind
but I had issues with the readers with pronouncations. (you ran
the words for and the together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded
nothing like what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have known the
correct words and the tests would have made <spelling error>
sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling error> If yur going to read on tape then you must
be able to speak properly and say your words properly. (You
misspelled the word you're--or at least I think that's what you
meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a
time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for
the blind to be recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you
meant 'only one tape at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know what you
are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a big
deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT
BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY CORRECT E-MAIL
MESSAGES.
On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote:
aAmen if you don't braille than you are
not truly literate. If you doubt this then read emails from
blind people who don't know braille there spelling and gramar
and punctuation leave alot to be desired. I have been there
myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well.
If you truly want to be literate then you just have toread and
not just listen to audio. Those of us who do prefer braille
and would rather read than listen have only audio as the option
all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to
read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't
amagine my life with out braille. I have had braille most of my
life and I would loose independence ifI were to not know
braille. Reading braille is active reading but listening to
audio or computer speech is just passive reading. I prefer to
activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio
only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books
acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though
it was just what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all.
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing
Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in
1987-1988 and I could have donee much better if I had braille.
I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I had issues with
the readers with pronouncations. I remember taking test and
what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard
on the tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would
have known the correct words and the tests would have made
sinse. If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to
speak properly and say your words properly. There was the issue
of only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book
to recording for the blind to be recorded. Audio is usless if I
don't know what you are saying. This is why we need braille.
Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book
is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge difference
between not learning braille if you've lost your site later in
life. The unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind
since birth are not learning braille at the rate they were
when I was a kid 50 years ago. If you are blind since birth
and you don't learn braille you miss out on basic literacy.
How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and
such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you
already understand these things so knowing braille isn't as
paramount.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Victor
Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM
To: main@techtalk.groups.io
Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose their
eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn
braille. It is much easier for them to access information by
listening to audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over
losing their eyesight and live without seeing their loved ones
or other things ever again. The last thing they want is to
learn a new skill that they may find just too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group where are
the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the
group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40
refreshable braille display for everyone to examine. I was the
only blind person in the room interested in touching the
device because I knew braille and I owned a previous
generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I knew
that they were not interested because most of them had lost
their eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it
much easier to listen to audio than reading braille. Plus,
most of them had learned how to access information using their
iPhones. I’m sure they found it much easier to whip out their
iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts, scan documents
and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize
that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not
found a way to obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is
into these types of gadgets. However, many blind people have
discovered how great these gadgets are and how useful they can
be in helping them become more independent. For many of us,
that is the route we have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person
who is not interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard
on those people. Maybe they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist now. I am
also glad that low cost refreshable braille displays are being
developed. I definitely don’t miss the days of carrying bulky
braille books to and from my classes. I do not miss the days
of trying to look up words in the dictionary and dealing with
a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not
miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display, I would
definitely look into obtaining the orbit braille reader or the
braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian
<bsackrider55@...> wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I would be
willing to pay a few dollars to get braille. I am not saying
that I should get for free but not to have the option is my
complaint. My local liberary use to provide braille for 10
cents per page. I was also told that if I provided the
paper they would braille what I wanted. They required 67
weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to often we
are forced to except only audio as the only format that is
available. Braille will always be my prefered format because
I prefer to read for myself instead of just listen. You say
that you hate braille but you can use it well I feel the
same about audio. Why do we have to be locked in to just one
format? How many people would rather read than listen?
Blind or sighted. People who prefer to read than should be
commended instead of being kind of bashed for it. If not
many blind people request braille than it should be no
trouble to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to
produce once you have the equipment. my liberary had no
trouble all they needed was files in microsoft word and the
paper and they were good to go. I use to get my weekly
meterials for my church all in grade 2 braille. It was
really great to finally be an active participant in the
service instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read
along with everyone else the verses and hyms and classes
lessons is a great feeling you just can't discribe the
independence that it givesyou. It's kind of like having
access to dvs you can finally know what is going on when
there is all of that dead air. I was able to read infront
of the church and be active in bible study and even lead the
groop all using braille. I do use braille menus when ever
possible even if I don't really need it just to let them see
that somone is acually using it. Braille has given me a
very full life and I don't know whear my life would be with
out braille. I feel that every blind person who is able to
read braille should learn it. I do understand that there
are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents
them from being able to read braille. For them they have no
choice but to use audio but I do have the choice I just
don't like being limited to just audio only and not
braille. You hate braille and I hate audio. a good example
of when I wish that I had braille instead of a file was when
I requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my lions
club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no
braille manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to
the help file on the machine and try to find what I wanted.
When I called the paper office they asked what files my
machine could read. If I had a braille manual I could have
just looked it up while on the phone and gave them the
answer. I had to call back after I went to the help file
and found it. This is very time concuming I can look up
somthing much faster in braille than any other format. I am
not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted person can
with print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the
job done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school
the blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of
our books were in braille. There was no I don't want to
learn it you had to. I will say that I can certainly listen
much faster than I can read but when it comes to looking up
somthing braille is faster hands down. I have been blind
since birth and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's like
the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn the
opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me
because they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I
was learning and making progress and I should had the right
to continue but they said no. If somone really wants to
learn a new skil then they should beallowed to do so. If I
am determind to learn somthing that then I will even though
it might take more time then the teacher would like. I
guess that modavation means nothing. If somone reallly
wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month to
do so they should not be told no you can't continue. If
companies had the equipment to produce braille they could
charge me for the cost of the paper to get braille manuals
or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote:
Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the hassle it is
to create
it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many
times when I
would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a manual
in Audio
format. many times have I had to just Wing it, learning
by Guess and
by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the Blind,
Guessing was
not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong could
ruin your
day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To produce it
is just not an
easy task. And I would guess that most manufacturers of
items for
the blind, may not want to hire another Staff member to do
nothing
but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing such a
thing is
considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF format,
if not an
Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer, I can
then print
out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I do
without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an Audio to
Text
converter, and then print that file out in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I need to
go On Line
to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least that much,
but I
always look to see if I can just download the manual so I
don't need
to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over and
over again to
look for Work Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate it. So a
Braille
Manual would be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the Company
doesn't send
a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or even
Audio, if
you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to
convert that Audio or
PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and can't
afford a
Braille Printer, there are Services that will take your
Manual file
and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part of
the Life of
someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers
to read
Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of Recorded
material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before smart
Phones had
built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them $10 an
hour too. this
was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So often,
regardless of
what Format it comes in, the information in the thing is
totally Nuts!
It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is a
Translation of
something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese to
Spanish and then
Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so poorly
written, lack
helpful information and seem to be missing a great deal of
actual
instructional information and are next to useless in any
format.
Grumpy Dave
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
Now Brian,
I don't want to personalize this, but you say you're a good Braille reader now: correct? You say that people who use audio primarily aren't truly literate and you can tell by the way they write e-mails: is that what you're saying? Well let me be your teacher and quote and correct your own mistakes that you have made in your lengthy reply.
<spelling error> aAmen(I guess you are trying to say Amen to that or something similar--note the repetition of the first letter A.)
<grammatical clumsiness> if you don't braille than you are not truly literate. (I guess you mean: if you don't know/use/are competent in, Braille then you are not truly literate.)
<run on sentence> If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't know braille there spelling and (There should be a period after the word Braille.)
<spelling error> gramar and punctuation leave alot to be desired. (In this sentence grammar and a lot are misspelled.)
<run on sentence> I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. (There should be a period after the word myself.)
If you truly want to be literate then you just have <spelling error> toread and not just listen to audio. (there is a run on word toread that should be separated into 'to read.') Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't <spelling error> amagine my life with out braille. (I guess you mean 'imagine my life without Braille.)
<wrong use of the word loose> I have had braille most of my life and I would loose independence (I guess you mean lose independence.)
<spelling error> ifI were to not know braille. (You ran the words If and I together.)
Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive reading.
I prefer to <spelling error> activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio only. (You misspelled actively.)
<spelling errors and a run on sentence> I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. (You misspelled remember, having, across and probably mean the word had when you wrote hav. And I almost forgot, you used the word though instead of thought.) (There should be a period after the word thought.)
The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I could have <spelling error> donee much better if I had braille. (You misspelled the word done.)
<spelling errors> I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I had issues with the readers with pronouncations. (you ran the words for and the together. You misspelled pronunciation.)
I remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes.
If I would have had my books in braille I would have known the correct words and the tests would have made <spelling error> sinse. (You misspelled the word sense.)
<spelling error> If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say your words properly. (You misspelled the word you're--or at least I think that's what you meant by writing the word yur.)
<grammatical oddity> There was the issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be recorded. (I'm not quite sure, but I think you meant 'only one tape at a time.)
<spelling error> Audio is usless if I don't know what you are saying. (You misspelled useless.)
This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
LONG STORY SHORT: BRIAN, YOU ARE A POOR EXAMPLE OF THE IDEA THAT BRAILLE READERS WRITE COHERENT AND GRAMATICALLY CORRECT E-MAIL MESSAGES.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 3/6/2020 3:01 PM, brian wrote: aAmen if you don't braille than you are not truly literate. If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't know braille there spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. If you truly want to be literate then you just have toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life with out braille. I have had braille most of my life and I would loose independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive reading. I prefer to activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I could have donee much better if I had braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would have known the correct words and the tests would have made sinse. If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say your words properly. There was the issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be recorded. Audio is usless if I don't know what you are saying. This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is.
Brian Sackrider
On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote:
This is true. There is a huge difference between not learning braille if you've lost your site later in life. The unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind since birth are not learning braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If you are blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out on basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you already understand these things so knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM To: main@techtalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose their eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn braille. It is much easier for them to access information by listening to audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and live without seeing their loved ones or other things ever again. The last thing they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group where are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable braille display for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person in the room interested in touching the device because I knew braille and I owned a previous generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I knew that they were not interested because most of them had lost their eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it much easier to listen to audio than reading braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to access information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts, scan documents and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not found a way to obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is into these types of gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how great these gadgets are and how useful they can be in helping them become more independent. For many of us, that is the route we have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person who is not interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist now. I am also glad that low cost refreshable braille displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from my classes. I do not miss the days of trying to look up words in the dictionary and dealing with a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display, I would definitely look into obtaining the orbit braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian <bsackrider55@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I would be willing to pay a few dollars to get braille. I am not saying that I should get for free but not to have the option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide braille for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I provided the paper they would braille what I wanted. They required 67 weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to often we are forced to except only audio as the only format that is available. Braille will always be my prefered format because I prefer to read for myself instead of just listen. You say that you hate braille but you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we have to be locked in to just one format? How many people would rather read than listen? Blind or sighted. People who prefer to read than should be commended instead of being kind of bashed for it. If not many blind people request braille than it should be no trouble to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once you have the equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they needed was files in microsoft word and the paper and they were good to go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my church all in grade 2 braille. It was really great to finally be an active participant in the service instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read along with everyone else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a great feeling you just can't discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's kind of like having access to dvs you can finally know what is going on when there is all of that dead air. I was able to read infront of the church and be active in bible study and even lead the groop all using braille. I do use braille menus when ever possible even if I don't really need it just to let them see that somone is acually using it. Braille has given me a very full life and I don't know whear my life would be with out braille. I feel that every blind person who is able to read braille should learn it. I do understand that there are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents them from being able to read braille. For them they have no choice but to use audio but I do have the choice I just don't like being limited to just audio only and not braille. You hate braille and I hate audio. a good example of when I wish that I had braille instead of a file was when I requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no braille manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to the help file on the machine and try to find what I wanted. When I called the paper office they asked what files my machine could read. If I had a braille manual I could have just looked it up while on the phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back after I went to the help file and found it. This is very time concuming I can look up somthing much faster in braille than any other format. I am not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted person can with print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the job done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books were in braille. There was no I don't want to learn it you had to. I will say that I can certainly listen much faster than I can read but when it comes to looking up somthing braille is faster hands down. I have been blind since birth and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me because they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I was learning and making progress and I should had the right to continue but they said no. If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they should beallowed to do so. If I am determind to learn somthing that then I will even though it might take more time then the teacher would like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If somone reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month to do so they should not be told no you can't continue. If companies had the equipment to produce braille they could charge me for the cost of the paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote: Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the hassle it is to create it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many times when I would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a manual in Audio format. many times have I had to just Wing it, learning by Guess and by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the Blind, Guessing was not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong could ruin your day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To produce it is just not an easy task. And I would guess that most manufacturers of items for the blind, may not want to hire another Staff member to do nothing but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing such a thing is considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF format, if not an Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer, I can then print out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I do without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an Audio to Text converter, and then print that file out in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I need to go On Line to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least that much, but I always look to see if I can just download the manual so I don't need to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over and over again to look for Work Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate it. So a Braille Manual would be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the Company doesn't send a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or even Audio, if you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to convert that Audio or PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and can't afford a Braille Printer, there are Services that will take your Manual file and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part of the Life of someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers to read Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before smart Phones had built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them $10 an hour too. this was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So often, regardless of what Format it comes in, the information in the thing is totally Nuts! It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is a Translation of something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese to Spanish and then Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so poorly written, lack helpful information and seem to be missing a great deal of actual instructional information and are next to useless in any format.
Grumpy Dave
-- They Ask Me If I'm Happy; I say Yes. They ask: "How Happy are You?" I Say: "I'm as happy as a stow away chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
This is where a little effort goes a long way. Especially if you're hammering the point about spelling and such. Whatever happened to trying to improve or better oneself? The below isn't just a case of the odd typo or misspelling, but more like a "why should I care or bother" attitude. Yes, Braille has all sorts of benefits for building a solid foundation, but just because you don't know or have access to Braille doesn't mean you suddenly don't have to bother trying to learn how to spell or punctuate. I mean seriously, dude. Try. Cristóbal
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of brian Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 2:23 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business If you get the writter magazine they will tell that if you want to be a good writter than you have to read alot. They are published writters who make their living from their writting. For the record I have never claimed that my writting skills are any better than any one elses I did say that are not as they should be. This is because I don't read like I did in school. I am only blind I am not deaf blind. I am sure that I am not the only blind person whos writting skills are not as they should be. It is all because we don't access to paper braille as we should to keep our writting skills as they should be. wWhen blind people don't read their reading will suffer as I said that mine does. When people say that we don't braille because we have audio and screen readers they are not telling the truth. If you never read how words are spelled then you will sound try to guess how they are spelled by sounding them out. As we all know not all words are spelled like they sound. This is a very big problem if you only listen. For example if you never read the word laugh in braille you might spell it laf because thats the way that it sounds. Why would have any reason to think that was wrong? You would think that that word must be spelled because thats they it sounds. You may say why don't you just use spell check. If you don't read then you would have no way of knowing that was the wrong way to spell the word. Another example is people say words not the way that should be said. All of my life I have always heard the word wash pronounced as worsh so I would write it that way because I had no reason to question it. Once I read the word then I knew that it was spelled wash and not worsh. The way that people talk is very confusing to blindpeople if you can't read for yourself. You may never know that not all words are spelled as they sound. If you did learn proper spelling back in school and you don't read you will forget how many words are spelled after many years of not reading. When I was in school my teachers did not tell me that my writting skills were very bad they could be better and thats we are in school to learn and get our skills as they should be. If you don't use them then you will loose them. I do think that when I was in school my reading and writting was better than it is now because I had to do it every day. Now I don't have to. I have no problem with somone telling that I spelled a word wrong and even sighted people spell words wrong so it's not a blindness thing. No one is going to rember how every word is spelled any one can be wrong. Brian Sackrider On 3/6/2020 4:45 PM, Ann Parsons wrote: Hi all,
I believe that Brian writes as well as he is able. Not sure what his difficulties may be e.g. learning differences, DeafBlindness, whatever. Criticizing someone who is doing their best to communicate is not productive. Pointing out errors, yes, privately, but calling someone out for commenting on mistakes made by others when he, himself, has made mistakes may feel good, but is, in my view, unproductive. That's what I was referring to, Gene.
Sorry, I keep forgetting to quote stuff. This mailer doesn't quote automatically.
Ann P.
|
|
locked
Re: warning if you doing business
I'm sorry, but this message is difficult to read. Is this a self-troll?
Cristóbal
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of brian Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 12:01 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business aAmen if you don't braille than you are not truly literate. If you doubt this then read emails from blind people who don't know braille there spelling and gramar and punctuation leave alot to be desired. I have been there myself if I don't read then I to will fall in to trap as well. If you truly want to be literate then you just have toread and not just listen to audio. Those of us who do prefer braille and would rather read than listen have only audio as the option all to often. For me if I want to stay literate then I have to read braille and as I said in my email to Grumpy Dave I can't amagine my life with out braille. I have had braille most of my life and I would loose independence ifI were to not know braille. Reading braille is active reading but listening to audio or computer speech is just passive reading. I prefer to activly read but most of the time I can't because it's audio only. I do rember haveing to cary volumes of braille books acrost campus at the blind school but I never gave it a though it was just what I hav to do it was no problem for me at all. The campus at the Michigan school for the blind in Lansing Michigan covered a 4 city block area. I tried college back in 1987-1988 and I could have donee much better if I had braille. I had tapes from recording forthe blind but I had issues with the readers with pronouncations. I remember taking test and what I heard during the test sounded nothing like what I heard on the tapes. If I would have had my books in braille I would have known the correct words and the tests would have made sinse. If yur going to read on tape then you must be able to speak properly and say your words properly. There was the issue of only tape at a time and having to send 2 copies of every book to recording for the blind to be recorded. Audio is usless if I don't know what you are saying. This is why we need braille. Braille readers don't make a big deal of how many volumes a book is it just is. Brian Sackrider On 3/6/2020 7:26 AM, chris judge wrote: This is true. There is a huge difference between not learning braille if you've lost your site later in life. The unfortunate fact is that even people who are blind since birth are not learning braille at the rate they were when I was a kid 50 years ago. If you are blind since birth and you don't learn braille you miss out on basic literacy. How do you learn proper spelling, grammar, punctuation and such if you don't learn braile. If you have had site you already understand these things so knowing braille isn't as paramount.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Sent: March 6, 2020 12:42 AM To: main@techtalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] warning if you doing business
Hello everyone:
I would like to point out that many blind people lose their eyesight later in life and they find it too difficult to learn braille. It is much easier for them to access information by listening to audio. It’s hard enough for them to get over losing their eyesight and live without seeing their loved ones or other things ever again. The last thing they want is to learn a new skill that they may find just too difficult.
After obtaining my iPhone, I attended a users group where are the people taught each other to use iOS devices. While at the group one day, one of the group leaders brought a focus 40 refreshable braille display for everyone to examine. I was the only blind person in the room interested in touching the device because I knew braille and I owned a previous generation of that device. It was not discussed, but I knew that they were not interested because most of them had lost their eyesight later in life. I suspect that they found it much easier to listen to audio than reading braille. Plus, most of them had learned how to access information using their iPhones. I’m sure they found it much easier to whip out their iPhones and listen to their books, podcasts, scan documents and do everything else we can do with our iPhones. I realize that not everyone owns a smart phone because they have not found a way to obtain one. I also realize that not everyone is into these types of gadgets. However, many blind people have discovered how great these gadgets are and how useful they can be in helping them become more independent. For many of us, that is the route we have chosen.
In any case, don’t be too surprised if you meet a blind person who is not interested in learning braille. Don’t be too hard on those people. Maybe they just prefer to do what is easier.
I am so glad that refreshable braille displays exist now. I am also glad that low cost refreshable braille displays are being developed. I definitely don’t miss the days of carrying bulky braille books to and from my classes. I do not miss the days of trying to look up words in the dictionary and dealing with a whole bookshelf of braille books. No thank you! I do not miss my five volume braille New Testament.
If I did not already on a refreshable braille display, I would definitely look into obtaining the orbit braille reader or the braille me.
Anyhow, these are just my rambling opinions.
Victor Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 5, 2020, at 7:40 PM, brian <bsackrider55@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Grumpy Dave for your explination. I would be willing to pay a few dollars to get braille. I am not saying that I should get for free but not to have the option is my complaint. My local liberary use to provide braille for 10 cents per page. I was also told that if I provided the paper they would braille what I wanted. They required 67 weight paper which I can get at Staples. All to often we are forced to except only audio as the only format that is available. Braille will always be my prefered format because I prefer to read for myself instead of just listen. You say that you hate braille but you can use it well I feel the same about audio. Why do we have to be locked in to just one format? How many people would rather read than listen? Blind or sighted. People who prefer to read than should be commended instead of being kind of bashed for it. If not many blind people request braille than it should be no trouble to provide it. Braille is not that dificult to produce once you have the equipment. my liberary had no trouble all they needed was files in microsoft word and the paper and they were good to go. I use to get my weekly meterials for my church all in grade 2 braille. It was really great to finally be an active participant in the service instead just a pasive listener. To be able to read along with everyone else the verses and hyms and classes lessons is a great feeling you just can't discribe the independence that it givesyou. It's kind of like having access to dvs you can finally know what is going on when there is all of that dead air. I was able to read infront of the church and be active in bible study and even lead the groop all using braille. I do use braille menus when ever possible even if I don't really need it just to let them see that somone is acually using it. Braille has given me a very full life and I don't know whear my life would be with out braille. I feel that every blind person who is able to read braille should learn it. I do understand that there are blind people who have medical conditions that prevents them from being able to read braille. For them they have no choice but to use audio but I do have the choice I just don't like being limited to just audio only and not braille. You hate braille and I hate audio. a good example of when I wish that I had braille instead of a file was when I requested my local newspaper to be accessable. my lions club purchassed a sara reading machine for me there was no braille manual but there was a print manual. I had to go to the help file on the machine and try to find what I wanted. When I called the paper office they asked what files my machine could read. If I had a braille manual I could have just looked it up while on the phone and gave them the answer. I had to call back after I went to the help file and found it. This is very time concuming I can look up somthing much faster in braille than any other format. I am not saying that I can do it as quick as a sighted person can with print but for me it's the fastest way for me to get the job done. When I was a kid I attended the Michigan school the blind in Lansing and we had to learn braille and all of our books were in braille. There was no I don't want to learn it you had to. I will say that I can certainly listen much faster than I can read but when it comes to looking up somthing braille is faster hands down. I have been blind since birth and thats all I ever knew was braille. It's like the sighted grew up with print. I wanted to learn the opticon at the rehab center but they would not let me because they said that I was not fast enough. I felt that I was learning and making progress and I should had the right to continue but they said no. If somone really wants to learn a new skil then they should beallowed to do so. If I am determind to learn somthing that then I will even though it might take more time then the teacher would like. I guess that modavation means nothing. If somone reallly wants to learn braille so what ifit takes several month to do so they should not be told no you can't continue. If companies had the equipment to produce braille they could charge me for the cost of the paper to get braille manuals or catalogs.
On 3/5/2020 9:26 PM, Dave wrote: Hello Brian,
I have nothing against Braille other than the hassle it is to create it, such as a Manual in Braille.
I've been blind for a long time now, and there were many times when I would have Kissed the Feet of anyone who gave me a manual in Audio format. many times have I had to just Wing it, learning by Guess and by Golly. Once Computers became a Tool for the Blind, Guessing was not always the best thing to do, as guessing wrong could ruin your day in a Big way. Still can.
but, Brian, I have no Beef with Braille. To produce it is just not an easy task. And I would guess that most manufacturers of items for the blind, may not want to hire another Staff member to do nothing but print out Manuals in Braille.
Yes, it all sounds good, until the costs of doing such a thing is considered.
These days, I do expect a Manual at least in a PDF format, if not an Audio file. And if I own my own Braille Printer, I can then print out the PDF file.
Although, I can't afford one of those printers, so I do without.
However, I could run the Audio file through an Audio to Text converter, and then print that file out in Braille.
When I get nothing but an On Line Manual, where I need to go On Line to read the thing. I am Thankful for at least that much, but I always look to see if I can just download the manual so I don't need to be going On Line so much.
Call it my personal Taste.
I would think most who are Blind have learned over and over again to look for Work Arounds for doing many things in Life.
You like Braille, and while I do use it, I Hate it. So a Braille Manual would be a waste of resources to send me one.
You Love it, and can use it well. So, when the Company doesn't send a manual in Braille, but has sent you one in PDF, or even Audio, if you want a manual in Braille, the Work around is to convert that Audio or PDF file into Braille. And if you are like me, and can't afford a Braille Printer, there are Services that will take your Manual file and make you a manual in Braille.
it may cost you a few dollars, which again is all part of the Life of someone who is Blind. In the past, I have hired Readers to read Manuals on Tape. Paid them $10 for every hour of Recorded material.
I've paid people to read my Mail. This was before smart Phones had built in Cameras and OCR programs. I paid them $10 an hour too. this was back in the 1980's and 90's.
I haven't had to hire anyone for about 20 years now
And Dare I bring up the Quality of Manuals? So often, regardless of what Format it comes in, the information in the thing is totally Nuts! It doesn't make Sense, and you can't tell if it is a Translation of something in Chinese to English, or from Chinese to Spanish and then Russian, and then to English etc.
And some manuals that come in English are so poorly written, lack helpful information and seem to be missing a great deal of actual instructional information and are next to useless in any format.
Grumpy Dave
|
|