telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (06/03/90)
I hope no one will be angry with me for drawing this topic to a close at this time ... it has occupied a lot of bandwidth here in recent days, and like so many 'political' problems relating to telecom, the discussion could go on a lot longer. My suggestion is that the discounts should continue, for perhaps a maximum period of another eighteen months -- say, until January 1, 1992. During the interim period, an effort would be made to convert as many TDD users as possible over to high speed modems and 'BBS like' software, so that for all practical purposes they could participate in the world with the rest of us. I'd even go so far as to say the money presently allocated for relay services and the like could be partially used to subsidize the purchase of inexpensive terminals with high speed modems. For those deaf persons who already had computers and modems, some software would be available at a reduced (if necessary) price. Then following the cut off date, no more discounts for slowness ... or maybe, a much smaller discount at present, which would go on for a few more months of the coversion, then a final end to it. That's just my solution; it seems a fair way to end the costs others are paying while still lending help to our deaf citizens. To bring a close to this topic, this issue has three more final comments, including one from the person who started the thread. Patrick Townson
"Yossi (Joel" <joel%TECHUNIX.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu> (06/05/90)
In article <8564@accuvax.nwu.edu> telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 408, Message 1 of 4 >My suggestion is that the discounts should continue, for perhaps a >maximum period of another eighteen months -- say, until January 1, >1992. During the interim period, an effort would be made to convert as >many TDD users as possible over to high speed modems and 'BBS like' >software, so that for all practical purposes they could participate in >the world with the rest of us. I'd even go so far as to say the money >Then following the cut off date, no more discounts for slowness ... or >maybe, a much smaller discount at present, which would go on for a few >more months of the coversion, then a final end to it. I have to point out that the problem is >NOT< the baud rate of TDD's. Most people don't type 60 WPM anyway. The problem is the medium itself. It simply takes longer to type what you want to say than to speak it. Information normally encoded by intonation and stress, for example, have to be spelled out. Consider how many conventions we use on the net: :-) *sigh* :-( >EMPHASIS< and how much longer it takes us to type them that it would to utter them. Written communication is never as fast as spoken communication, and so if the discount is designed to compensate for slowness, moving to 1200 WPM machines is irrelevent. Joel p.s. This is not to say that moving to better TDD's is not a great idea, just that the original reasons for the discount still apply.
John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com> (06/08/90)
"Yossi (Joel" <joel%TECHUNIX.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu> writes: > I have to point out that the problem is >NOT< the baud rate of TDD's. > Consider how many conventions we use > on the net: :-) *sigh* :-( >EMPHASIS< and how much longer it takes us > to type them that it would to utter them. Yes, but consider something else that goes on on the net -- batched, high-speed data transfer. I understand that there is frequent need for interactive "conversation", but a lot of the time someone just needs to send a message and may or may not even need a reply. When you or I sit down to spill our guts on this forum, or reply to those who privately take issue with us, we sit down and type at our leisure. Maybe we get up to have lunch, do other work, whatever. None of this time is spent "on line". Perhaps equipment for the deaf can be designed so that it offers the option of interactive OR e-mail-style communications. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
KLH@nic.ddn.mil (Ken Harrenstien) (06/10/90)
>Yes, but consider something else that goes on on the net -- batched, >high-speed data transfer. I understand that there is frequent need for >interactive "conversation", but a lot of the time someone just needs >to send a message and may or may not even need a reply. Some TDDs do have a "memory" option that allows users to store fairly short messages (2000 chars or so) and send the text in a burst (at 6 or 30 cps, depending). I doubt anyone knows whether this feature is actually used much; I myself don't, but I probably type faster than most people. Instead of saying whether this is a good idea or not, let me just turn the question around. Why don't all you hearies invest a little money in something to store your voice and play it back at high speed? I believe there are commercial devices for high-speed intelligible playback, which some blind people use to maximize their information input. Or even better, add a compression encoder so that whenever you call someone with the corresponding decoder, you can squeeze your entire soliloquy into a three-second burst. Add encryption for free. I believe the arguments for and against such a scheme (cost, convenience, compatibility, etc) are identical to those for and against batched TDD data transfer. Conclusions, if any, left as an exercise. Ken