Thurgood Marshall was the historical figure. He used it in his arguments before the Supremes in Brown v. Board of Education. On Mar 28, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Sina Bahram wrote: > I disagree. I think if you follow good web standards, and appropriate > practices, then it can be accessible for all users. > > To borrow an excellent line from my friend, Chris Hofstader, which he > shamelessly and proudly stole from a wonderful historical > figure: > > Separate is not equal. > > Let's accept that, and move on. > > Take care, > Sina > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qubit > Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 9:50 PM > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online > > So you view cloud as innovation -- it is interesting, I'll say that. But > that gets back to the agent string problem I mentioned in > my last mail. If the string (or whatever it is) indicates a certain user > needs a special accessible web page, then that web author > will be forced to maintain 2 versions, and the whole segregation thing comes > in again. > It is as costly to maintain multiple webpages as it is to design one, and > most site authors will not do it readily, not because of > lack of caring, but for economic reasons. > I will read on in my mail before commenting further, except to say that we > are talking about something different from the web as in > the 90s, so I need to read up on cloud before getting more involved in this > discussion. > --le > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jared Wright" <wright.jaredm@xxxxxxxxx> > To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 4:45 PM > Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online > > > I would think a part of optimizing any sort of cloud-based, widespread > accessibility framework would involve discerning which users were using > it so as to not send a lot of unnecessary accessibility-related data > back and forth with users who aren't utilizing it. As more and more > software goes into the cloud, it seems reasonable to assume that > accessibility features of those cloud-based applications might be > enabled or disabled on a per user level, and a user could seemingly be > asociated to whatever accessibility features they have chosen to enable. > As the software goes into the cloud, some of the accessibility will need > to as well. It won't always be sufficient to have local access solutions > for dynamically changing applications on a web platform, although most > access solutions today are based locally. > > Just clarifying what I think the issue might be, personally I at this > juncture am simply willing to put my paranoia aside in favor of the > increased flexibility and potential of the cloud computing model. I want > privacy to be protected, but I'd rather not see technology stagnate on > account of it. > > Jared > > > > > > On 3/27/2010 4:29 PM, Sina Bahram wrote: >> How are they easy to identify? >> >> I'm not sure why you are blanketly accepting this premis? >> >> How would you identify someone is using a screen reader or any other >> assistive technology if they are connecting via a web service, >> SSH, private protocol, or whatever. >> >> Take care, >> Sina >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qubit >> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 4:17 PM >> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online >> >> Interesting argument. My only question is, would I have access to my own >> data on the server? >> Anyway, I agree privacy applies to everyone equally and not just persons >> with disabilities, but I think one difference is that the >> disabled persons accessing the server are easy to identify, and therefore >> there is an inherent privacy issue for them in particular. >> I don't know if this is why the statement appears in the GAS. Perhaps >> Chris can answer. >> --le >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sina Bahram"<sbahram@xxxxxxxxx> >> To:<programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 2:28 PM >> Subject: RE: GNU Accessibility Statement Online >> >> >> With all due respect, I don't believe anyone deserves or needs privacy >> more >> so or less than someone else. Privacy should be an >> inalienable right given to all individuals or none. So, I respectfully >> disagree that folks with disabilities are any different than >> those without disabilities, or certain ethnicity groups, and so forth. >> >> With respect to your seemingly circular argument that cloud computing >> somehow is more or less secure than self computing. I do not >> accept this as a reason nor as a valid excuse. It seems that your primary >> argument against cloud computing revolves around the >> decentralization of information from one's own ownership. In other words, >> you claim that because my data resides in Boston, New >> York, or Beijing, it is somehow less secure than if it is on a computer >> system I own. >> >> If you like, I can actually point you to several academic papers which >> have >> shown quite effective double blind security measures; >> for example, using something like pgp for communication layer, AES for >> data >> protection, anonymizers for privacy protection, and >> things such as the onion router for protection against tracing you down >> via >> TCP/IP access patterns. >> >> So I believe if appropriate measures are taken, it can actually be far >> better with respect to privacy concerns that one's data is >> not on computers that one owns. That way, it is not tied to a physical >> object that can be linked to you. To this end, I posit that >> keeping the data on your own computer can be just as, if not more so, >> harmful to privacy, and I disagree with the free software >> foundation's inaccurate advice to keep data in one easy to surveil, easy >> to >> capture, and easy to associate place. The techniques you >> suggest and advocate for can actually harm privacy related concerns, not >> advance them. >> >> All of this having been said, why are we mentioning it in an accessibility >> statement? >> >> Why? >> >> Just talk about accessibility, not about privacy. >> >> Take care, >> Sina >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris >> Hofstader >> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 12:23 PM >> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online >> >> Hi, >> >> I don't disagree and wanted the statement removed but it is a GNU >> statement >> and must, therefore, it needs to reflect the >> fundamentals of FSF. >> >> Also, people with disabilities need privacy more so than others as >> everything from insurance premiums to potential lawsuits may >> cause problems when and if someone gets access to their information. >> Remember, a person with disability will cost more to insure so >> companies may be reluctant to hire them for that reason alone. >> >> If asked about this statement, though, we can point to Bill Gates who, in >> a >> COMDEX keynote address a bunch of years ago, he made a >> strong statement against server based programs, citing a value of putting >> computes in the hands of the individual and also raising >> privacy concerns. >> >> Also, there are people in jail in China because Yahoo turned over records >> stored on their servers. Why not expect that the US >> security infrastructure would be following all transactions on Skype, MSN, >> etc. giving them a lot of information into which they can >> cast a wide net. >> >> There's a lot of problems with server based systems ranging from privacy >> to >> a centralized data bank that can be mined for all sorts >> of reasons. >> >> Lastly, there is the question of who controls your computing and your >> data. >> Local systems put you in charge while who knows what >> google might do with or to your information. >> >> Of course, I could be wrong. >> >> cdh >> On Mar 27, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Sina Bahram wrote: >> >> >>> The following statement really got to me: >>> >>> "and please don't invite users to do something on a server that they >>> could >>> conceivably do on their own computers." >>> >>> I understand that Stallmann is one of the leading activists against >>> cloud computing, but why on earth are you allowing such an agenda to >>> creap >>> into a statement on accessibility? >>> >>> In my opinion, this one statement completely undermines the rest of the >>> things you're trying to do. >>> >>> Take care, >>> Sina >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris >>> Hofstader >>> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 9:00 AM >>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: GNU Accessibility Statement Online >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> For a couple of months, Richard Stallman and I have been working on >>> the GNU Accessibility Statement (GAS) which takes a no nonsense >>> approach to endorsing the rights of people with disabilities as regard >>> software within the context of free software. I've never >>> >> read a more strongly worded statement from any organization regarding >> software and people with disabilities. >> >>> GAS also takes a strong stance on free software values but does not >>> endorse any specific license, although we would like people to use GPL. >>> >>> You can read the statement at: >>> http://www.gnu.org/accessibility/accessibility.html >>> and send comments to me that we can consider for future revisions of the >>> statement. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> cdh >>> >>> __________ >>> View the list's information and change your settings at >>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >>> >>> __________ >>> View the list's information and change your settings at >>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >>> >>> >> __________ >> View the list's information and change your settings at >> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >> >> __________ >> View the list's information and change your settings at >> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >> >> __________ >> View the list's information and change your settings at >> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >> >> __________ >> View the list's information and change your settings at >> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind >> >> > > __________ > View the list's information and change your settings at > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > > __________ > View the list's information and change your settings at > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > > __________ > View the list's information and change your settings at > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind