[bksvol-discuss] NY Times Publicity

  • From: "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:43:10 -0500

Anyone else notice the article about a new device from Pulsedata in the
Circuites section of the New York Times?  It mentioned bookshare, so maybe
the site will get some unusual trafic today, because of people wondering
what the site is exactly and who can use it, since it didn't say anything
about being only for those with reading disabilities.

I also noticed the article had a mistake caused by the writers lack of
understanding of the technology discussed, which drives me nuts.  I have
written with a correction before, and don't really want to this time, since
I have lost my registration info, and can't request it because of an E-mail
change.  The article said the new device would have speech recognition
instead of speech output or TTS.  I'm so tired of people thinking that blind
people have computers with braille keyboards or speech recognition.  In this
case I think it was not that the reporter thought that, but that they didn't
know the correct term.  I certainly wouldn't want to try speech recognition
on a notetaker, especially since a 400 mhz processor would barely do the job
even if it was a 400 mhz processor of the same type they would use in a
normal sized computer, which it wouldn't be.  And who would be talking to
their notetaker in public anyway. <g>
Anyone else think corrections are important enough to send them an E-mail?
I certainly hope people do about other things, because I sometimes wonder if
there are as many mistakes in articles about mainstream technology.  I often
notice something being stated a little weirdly at least. :-)

Sarah Van Oosterwijck
curious entity at earthlink dot net


Other related posts:

  • » [bksvol-discuss] NY Times Publicity