Lies about CI's

Status
Not open for further replies.
hey yagazn - that reminds me of this one...

2bqs75.jpg
 
you silly. look like small brain in there.

peace
 
Jiro said:
and yet.... this is 2010 with broadband technology and still no CC? why did it take Obama to sign the legislation to mandate it?


um..... no? If they're able to broadcast video online... they can easily broadcast CC together with the video. It's simple, really.... but they didn't implement the CC feature for Internet broadcast and I will explain why.

A few years ago - I emailed a complaint to CNN to make their videos deaf-accessible. A man replied back. He apologized profusely and understood my frustration. He explained that it was a matter of bureaucratic legal issue regarding copyrights and the ownership of text.

It took Google and a deaf man to break the barrier. And then Obama to mandate it.
Click to expand...

Besides if digital hard- and softsub technology existed back then, then there's no reason why companies couldn't include it with their broadcasts.
 
posts from hell said:
ADA, Deaf rights, etc ... all by the culturally deaf...

ASL versions of websites is starting now.. because of the culturally deaf..

Our phones are much more advanced than the hearing population.... Why?? Oh yea, the culturally deaf too.

many more things in the works too.

now what have your people done?

Contributed to the massive profits of the professionals... yep.
Click to expand...

What is this "our phones" you're speaking of?
 
souggy said:
Besides if digital hard- and softsub technology existed back then, then there's no reason why companies couldn't include it with their broadcasts.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that matters now since we're forging new territories with the CC over the internet. Not to mention the up and coming hard to crack speech to text technology. Eventually communication technology will be our equalizer in a variety of ways.
 
kokonut said:
I don't see how that matters now since we're forging new territories with the CC over the internet. Not to mention the up and coming hard to crack speech to text technology. Eventually communication technology will be our equalizer in a variety of ways.
Click to expand...

Just to show that even though the technology exists at the time, it still requires Deaf activists to ram it.
 
kokonut said:
I don't see how that matters now since we're forging new territories with the CC over the internet. Not to mention the up and coming hard to crack speech to text technology. Eventually communication technology will be our equalizer in a variety of ways.
Click to expand...

no.... speech-to-text technology? that's a whole 'nother topic and that's not what we're very interested in. It would be nice but we deafies know it's not very feasible especially for public use. It's as feasible as Asimo as a substitute for a person :lol:

Our main beef is that since we have a live broadcasted news with live CC.... why not for Internet? DSL/Cable Modem came into picture about 5+ years ago and yet.... still no CC for internet shows right now?

Like I said in my previous post - it's all cuz of silly legal matter over texts and it's sad that it took Obama's Presidential power to end that farce.
 
If hearing parents put CI on their deaf child.
Then deaf parents should remove their hearing child's hear.

Fair!
 
Jiro said:
no.... speech-to-text technology? that's a whole 'nother topic and that's not what we're very interested in. It would be nice but we deafies know it's not very feasible especially for public use. It's as feasible as Asimo as a substitute for a person :lol:
Click to expand...

At the moment, it's not anywhere near to being feasible. It may be one day, but it isn't feasible at the moment. YouTube has the technology and it doesn't work very well. I can barely watch YouTube clips where they automatically caption them using the speech-to-text technology.
 
PowerON said:
If hearing parents put CI on their deaf child.
Then deaf parents should remove their hearing child's hear.

Fair!
Click to expand...

"Mom! I cant believe you put the CI in me!"

"Mom! I can't believe you took away my hearing!!"

TOTALLY the same thing.....:roll:
 
Banjo said:
At the moment, it's not anywhere near to being feasible. It may be one day, but it isn't feasible at the moment. YouTube has the technology and it doesn't work very well. I can barely watch YouTube clips where they automatically caption them using the speech-to-text technology.
Click to expand...

Notice that I put "... for public use" in my post.

A very advanced speech-to-text technology is actually available but mainly for government and major corporations. Its degree of accuracy is quite impressive but just simply not available and practical enough for public use on wide-scale level. This technology was developed Lucent's R&D lab decades ago. It was reserved for government especially NSA for its eavesdropping program. And then around early 2000's... movie theaters implemented this feature for automated phone call... and then certain companies' support department especially credit card companies.

The movie theater's automated telephone system impressed my dad. He called them... the computer asked him to say the name of movie in order to retrieve the viewing schedule. My dad speaks a semi-broken English (because there's no R-sound in Korean language) and the computer was able to understand him :lol:
 
PowerON said:
If hearing parents put CI on their deaf child.
Then deaf parents should remove their hearing child's hear.

Fair!
Click to expand...

:roll:


I :roll: cuz if DD ain't happy, ain't nobody happy. :) I mean :roll:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top