Google abandons Windows
in [UK Mac]
|
From: John DoH on 11 Jun 2010 13:00 In article <1jjvic6.1k0lz8pv3ovbhN%real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid>, real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > > > On 2010-06-09, John DoH <johndoh__(a)hotmail.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > James, I should point out that 'John DoH' is one of the sad no-lifers that > > likes to follow Rowland around usenet. > > What I find most entertaining about John DoH is that he doesn't seem to > realise how ill in the head he is. I know that's a bit cruel, but... So you are quite happy to attack someone you think is ill in the head, there is nothing new with that, you have been abusing people who are ill in the head for years. Those you abused for years in UPSD stood up to you and won't let you bully them anymore. > > DoH follows me around beacuse, once upon a time, he was viciously > attacking a friend of mine. So I had a go at him, and he switched his > obsession to me. Did I say your nose must be 3 foot, I will have to change that to at least 4 foot 6. Your so called friend Sarah was slightly more abusive than you and she definitely didn't like getting the same treatment that she dished out, so much so that she packed her bags earlier than you did. I am not at all sure why Sarah was so abusive to people, perhaps it was because she had been physically abused herself, she did say that you had been physical with her and I don't mean the blow-jobs she confessed that she had given you. > > DoH doesn't seem to have a life beyond being nasty to people on Usenet > and other places. By your rules you are a liar, how could you possibly be aware of what happens in other places, you are an out and out liar, but then we knew that didn't we Rowland, we have known you for years:-) > > Rowland. > > P.S. It was pathetically easy to draw his fire - I just insinuated that > his sexuality was non-hetero. Do you have an IDs of your posts where you insinuated that? I thought not :-) You won't let the truth get in the way of one of your stories :-) > Anyone who finds that insulting these > days is - well, it's probably unfair to pick on someone with that kind > of cognitive disability, let's put it like that. Someone with that kind of cognitive disability yet is capable of crafting posts to usenet that you consider could harm your reputation :-)))) you are funny Rowland :-)) > > I suspect I might have been presenting myself as something like Sandy or > Julian from Round the Horne during the process, just for the hell of it. If you had said Larry Grayson, I could almost believe you:-) -- "Telling someone to kill themselves is not harmful: it's merely me expressing an opinion. You try to drive people to suicide - that's evil. My behaviour is perfectly okay; your behaviour is evil - plain and simple evil." Rowland McDonnell - 9th. Mar. 2009
From: D.M. Procida on 11 Jun 2010 18:12 James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > >> The blind need to work with sighted workers in business, > > > > I don't see why wage slavery should be viewed as a necessary state of > > being - but I get your point aside from the social injustice you seem to > > be accepting as desirable (wage slavery, that is). > > That's not, but really it's generally assumed that the blind need > equipment for work. Many are unable to afford the technology they need. And that's just in the wealthy west with our disability rights legislation and effective political movements in support of the disabled. In other parts of the world, where there are more blind people because of a lack of basic interventions to prevent or cure blindness, blindness can be effectively a sentence to a life as beggar. Sometimes without the life bit. Every new technology that emerges that doesn't have accessibility built-in will, if it becomes important to economic survival, be part of the problems faced by the blind rather than part of the solution. That technology has to be available at the cheapest, most basic, lowest common denominator level. Daniele
From: James Jolley on 11 Jun 2010 18:45 On 2010-06-11 23:12:20 +0100, real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) said: > James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > >>>> The blind need to work with sighted workers in business, >>> >>> I don't see why wage slavery should be viewed as a necessary state of >>> being - but I get your point aside from the social injustice you seem to >>> be accepting as desirable (wage slavery, that is). >> >> That's not, but really it's generally assumed that the blind need >> equipment for work. Many are unable to afford the technology they need. > > And that's just in the wealthy west with our disability rights > legislation and effective political movements in support of the > disabled. > > In other parts of the world, where there are more blind people because > of a lack of basic interventions to prevent or cure blindness, blindness > can be effectively a sentence to a life as beggar. Sometimes without the > life bit. > > Every new technology that emerges that doesn't have accessibility > built-in will, if it becomes important to economic survival, be part of > the problems faced by the blind rather than part of the solution. > > That technology has to be available at the cheapest, most basic, lowest > common denominator level. > > Daniele Good point, it's worth noting that the blindness agencies and companies do tend to charge a great deal more for specialist technology, claiming small markets. I only go along with this so far now, seeing what Apple have managed to do has really improved my ability to function generally. There'd be no going back to Windows.
From: Rowland McDonnell on 11 Jun 2010 21:01 Richard Kettlewell <rjk(a)greenend.org.uk> wrote: > "Graham J" <graham(a)invalid> writes: > >> Gender is a grammatical term so that's meaningless, since English words > >> don't have gender .... > > Non-grammatical uses of 'gender' goes back at least to the C14th. [snip] But it was archaic in that sense by the start of the 20th century according to Fowler's Modern English Usage. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 11 Jun 2010 21:16
D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > > > >> The blind need to work with sighted workers in business, > > > > > > I don't see why wage slavery should be viewed as a necessary state of > > > being - but I get your point aside from the social injustice you seem to > > > be accepting as desirable (wage slavery, that is). > > > > That's not, but really it's generally assumed that the blind need > > equipment for work. Many are unable to afford the technology they need. > > And that's just in the wealthy west with our disability rights > legislation and effective political movements in support of the > disabled. > > In other parts of the world, where there are more blind people because > of a lack of basic interventions to prevent or cure blindness, blindness > can be effectively a sentence to a life as beggar. Sometimes without the > life bit. > > Every new technology that emerges that doesn't have accessibility > built-in will, if it becomes important to economic survival, be part of > the problems faced by the blind rather than part of the solution. > > That technology has to be available at the cheapest, most basic, lowest > common denominator level. It strikes me that one problem is that over the - oh, call it 30 years of serious GUI PC development - untold billions have been spent developing and optimizing and extending the abilites of the hardware and software used to generate computer visual output; and in developing the GUIs that use these modern fancy display systems we've got. But who's been seriously investing in developing the equivalent technology for the blind? Nothing remotely like the same scale of investment has occurred, has it? It seems to me that this sort of thing isn't going to be solved by the marketplace left to its own devices. And Danielle has a point. Thing is, we've got disability rights legislation. It's useful as far as it goes, but looking at the way the world is, it doesn't seem to have gone far enough. Thinking that one and one make two, it seems to me that the only solution is going to be some sort of legal stick to make the firms do the right thing - which is develop the technologies required for `decent accessibility' (however that be defined) in parallel with their other developments, ensuring that all the fancy tech is as usable by all as is practical. Basically, the buggers have got to be forced to spend money developing this stuff all the time - but how you'd frame the legislation, I've no idea. .... and it's not only the blind who need consideration here. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |