[nabs-l] Video Description

Sun Feb 8 11:23:47 UTC 2009

I do not know which signals they're using where you live, but around 
here all of the new ones have little noises at each pole to help you 
locate the thing (dumb), and are only as loud as they need to be to 
be heard over the traffic at the current intersection.  Each pole 
makes the noise if activated, rather than having one pole make the 
noise for all corners at once.

It is possible to activate the walk light without activating the 
chirper as well.  I just hit the button and walk like any sighted 
person would (just paying more attention than most of them do.)

Joseph

On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 10:50:39PM -0800, Jacob Struiksma wrote:
>The new audible singles are not safe because they will go off when it is not
>your turn when cars are turning.  The new ones are very loud and it makes it
>hard to tell which stop light the sounds are coming from and also the sound
>bounces from the tall buildings  With short blocks it is very hard to tell
>which intersection the sound is coming from..  It makes it hard to hear what
>the cars are doing.  I want to see the sidewalk fixed or improved before any
>audible singles are put in.  
>From
>Jacob Struiksma
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
>Of T. Joseph Carter
>Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:36 AM
>To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Video Description
>
>No, actually.  Consider the chirping lights.  The old models are actually
>dangerous to blind people.  Through the NFB's opposition to the things, new
>ones that get installed are much safer.
>
>Many in the NFB still argue the things are basically never necessary.  
>Having them fosters a false sense of security in undertrained blind
>pedestrians.  Without training, they may believe they can cross such a
>street safely, and realize their fatal mistake only when they hear the
>screech of brakes and tires.
>
>On the other side of the coin, the NFB argues that putting the things
>everywhere may cause sighted people to THINK we need them to cross streets.
>We want the blind to think about the things we can do, not the things they
>falsely believe that we cannot.
>
>Neither are good, so the NFB is opposed to the old ones, and indifferent to
>the new ones at best.  Generally, if they're installing the new types that
>are not as loud or have to be actually activated, and if they're installing
>them while they service an intersection (which dramatically reduces costs to
>"just" several thousand per intersection), we don't object too much.
>
>Our opponents like to simplify that position to, "The NFB refuses to allow
>blind people to have these things that would make us safer!"  I suppose it
>is easier to attack an opponent than their argument, though.  This is why I
>hate politics--but that's a whole 'nother email, and I won't write it here.
>*grin*
>
>Joseph
>
>On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 04:51:37AM -0500, sarah.jevnikar at utoronto.ca wrote:
>> Why would they be hostile? Isn't any accommodation a good one?
>>
>> Quoting "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Antonio,
>>>
>>> I don't see it.  What has the NFB done to further video description?
>>> Dr. Maurer has gone on record more than once that he doesn't see the 
>>> need for it, and the NFB has taken a stand against making video 
>>> description mandatory.
>>>
>>> At best, it seems the NFB is indifferent to video descriptions.  It 
>>> seems to be somewhat hostile toward them as an accommodation that we 
>>> don't need.
>>>
>>> Have I missed something?
>>>
>>> Joseph
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 10:36:46PM -0500, Antonio M. Guimaraes wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I think that video description is a non-issue. Blind people   
>>>> appretiate entertainment as much as the next guy, and video   
>>>> description greatly  enhances the viewing experience.
>>>>
>>>> The National Federation of the Blind is resolved to do work to   
>>>> ensure that every picture in every theater is audio described. I   
>>>> think that is a wonderful thing, and wish to see real effort being   
>>>> made on this direction.
>>>>
>>>> Short and sweet for once.
>>>>
>>>> Antonio Guimaraes
>>>> Shop online and support the NFB of RI at no additional cost to you.
>>>> http://www.givebackamerica.com/charity.php?b=169
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nabs-l mailing list
>>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>nabs-l:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/sarah.jevnika
>>> r%40utoronto.ca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>nabs-l:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph
>> %40gmail.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>nabs-l mailing list
>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>nabs-l:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/lawnmower84%40hotmai
>l.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>nabs-l mailing list
>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nabs-l:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com