Thanks Eric for the explanation.

Assistive tech is a rather new subject to me, and my perspective is still 
anchored in the mind of a sighted person who would rather spend 2k on his kid's 
education, a new laptop or a great hoiday than 2k on a device that's grossly 
overpriced and would last only a year before it looses value faster than i can 
regenrate funds for as there are many other things in life to consider.
I totally understand your position, that you actually test these devices, demo 
them to elderly people who probably have had sight most of their lives, and 
therefore don't much as mind spending 2k as the majority could afford it or 
wouldn't have the energy to go to Africa for example with hiking boots and a 
photography setup for blind individuals as an alternative source of 
entertainment.

Even after having crossed the line between sighted and blind, moreso now that i 
understand all the difficulties i have doing a lot of things i used to take for 
granted, the fact that these greedy corporations barricade themselves behind 
production costs to justify their prices. I just have a very hard time 
apprehending entities, individuals corporations, governments. Whatever you 
want, to make a profit on those who are fighting everyday for a better chance 
to just read books or quickly checking snail mail for crying out loud.

There has to be a change in this trend, and it has to come from the convergence 
of intellectual property, associative enterprising and the exposure of current 
corporate philosophies where it hurts.

There was a recent Lecture over here in AUckland Uni about the favorable switch 
the economic world has to experience before it can actually get better, and 
that is for corporations to stop artificial market injections and follow a more 
benevolent style of making business. The modern world is generating much more 
by working together rather than taking things behind closed doors, the threat 
of patent infringement and come-up with a device that's half-baked, has a life 
expectancy close to a percent of a human or canine lifetime, with eye gouging 
prices, and it also probably looks like a tentacle from hell Or a monolithic 
slab from stanley kubrick's imagination.

Taking this into context with what used to be, and looking at what it has done 
to people now you can't help but be cynical. Like you mention it, it's not what 
it used to be. Is that because those corporations who make assistive devices 
are all trying to squeeze the most out of every cent they spend? And more? And 
what is their R&D capacity? What's the percentage they funnel back into 
research, and how many products do they have to support their production? 
Those are the questions i ask myself when i buy a product that's pricy, like a 
bang and olufsen speaker or a mini austen instead of a second hand peugeot. 
There are incentives to these products, they are extremely durable, known, and 
best of all, don't loose value. Imagine having a Sony Ericsson Honda 
collaboration for a snap scanner text reader or an apple bang and olufsen 
retinal implant. This is a utopic jerk of my current existential state that 
will gratify an early morning stint to the coffee machine, soon to evaporate 
like the steam off the mug, but reflection on how to reach this type of world 
is worth a thousand expresso shots.

Oh, and i'm definetely not buying any assistive crap anytime soon Unless they 
come clean with their stuff, and that's stuff that works out of the box.


  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"MacVisionaries" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.

Reply via email to