RE: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

  • From: "DaShiell, Jude T. CIV NAVAIR 1490, 1, 26" <jude.dashiell@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:20:54 -0400

Now that I think of it, I'm in complete support of Richard Stallman's
position.  My reason for that is a security concern.  People doing tasks
on their own pc's are more likely to notice when those slow down or go
flakey in other ways just as a result of where their attention gets
focused for the time they're doing those tasks.  Additionally, having
user level computers hooked into a cloud network is inappropriate from a
security perspective since dumb terminals haven't sufficient resources
to be attacked in the first place.  Now, here's how a hacker could
locate all of the screen readers on a cloud network.  Search for all
connected equipment with higher resource profiles than most user level
terminals.  A few are going to be much better equipped and these are the
servers on that cloud network; next a level down from the servers are
all the screen readers with enough memory on them to run their screen
readers, and the low memory resourced PC's are the user level PC's or
terminals that don't have screen readers.  There are ways around this
detection scheme but they'll require foreign operating systems that
throw errors when windows-like commands get thrown at them by hackers
that would be within the higher resourced equipment.  Come to think of
it, that would be a way to protect the servers too.  Smart network
operations people might put a few high resource pc's on a network which
nobody uses and these would be tar pits or honey pots with remote
logging enabled so hackers couldn't be entirely sure what they had
caught with their testing scans. 


Rot47: <;F56]52D9:6==@?2GJ]>:=>
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Dunleavy
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 11:55
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

Hi Chris,

I think the warning against server based applications should be retained
in
some form.
Some time ago, on this mailing list, there was strong criticism of the
RoboBraille service.
The FSF has a more nuanced article about "cloud computing" at:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html

--Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Hofstader <cdh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online


> Hi,
>
> I have spent most of the last nine months working on NPII. I think it
is a
very good idea and can be managed in a way that can preserve anonymity
while
having some of its services running on a server. All software written by
RTF/NPII will have a free software license (I think it will be MIT) but
third parties, including proprietary software vendors, can use our back
end
to augment their products.
>
> The one problem with NPII is that it is a really big project and
raising
money to move it out of the discussion phase is an arduous process to
say
the least.
>
> As I said earlier, I'm collecting criticism and ideas for the next
version
of the GNU Accessibility Statement and appreciate the feedback.
>
> So, I think we can say that this group would prefer the server based
applications sentence be removed. Now, what do you guys think about
everything else in the statement?
>
> cdh
> On Mar 27, 2010, at 4:05 PM, qubit wrote:
>
> > I didn't see much technical at that website -- just a general
overview
and
> > FAQ and white paper.  But it is interesting.  I personally wonder if
it
is
> > possible to do what they want -- I mean, leveling the playing field
for
> > everyone with a broad range of disabilities and still allow normal
> > competition in the software market -- I say this because different
persons
> > have different and sometimes conflicting needs, which would require
> > different support not just on the net infrastructure, but also in
> > applications.
> > But it remains to be seen how successful this strategy will be.
> > Are you a member?
> > --le
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jamal Mazrui" <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Chris Hofstader" <cdh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 2:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: GNU Accessibility Statement Online
> >
> >
> > I agree that there are legitimate privacy concerns that one should
> > address when using web-based applications.  I also agree that, other
> > things being equal, it is better to get a computing job done
locally,
> > without needing an Internet connection.
> >
> > I also think that cloud computing offers much potential for people
with
> > disabilities if managed well.  A coalition of individuals and
> > organizations in the accessibility field believes this to be the
case,
> > and has proposed a "National Public Inclusive Infrastructure"
described
> > at the web site
> > http://npii.org/
> >
> > Jamal
> >
> > __________
> > 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

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. programmingblind
  3. Archive
  4. 03-2010