The end of terrestrial TV

On 15/01/2013 16:57, Brian Gaff wrote:
Because I have then lost my independence which is something I value greatly,

"Hear hear" Brian. For the record, I am born profoundly deaf myself and
just like Brian, I value my independence greatly.

I would far rather rely on electrical technology to address the
shortcomings of my deafness than to rely on people.

This is because technological equipment does not have "feelings and
emotions so you can ask a lot more of technology and "get away with it"
without upsetting technology.

Its much harder to do that with people because you have to consider
their feeelings, emotions etc and you do not want that person to feel
that you are a burden on them.

So I fully understand where Brian is coming from.

Stephen.


and I'd be waiting till next Tuesday to get anyone to do it. If its a really
good printout then I'd scan it in and get an or to read it, Unfortunately,
jpegs do not make good sources due to the dither effect of the compression.
we still have the human brain much better than the machine for this stuff.
I think I've made my case.
I will continue to point out this sort of issue as long as I'm on the
planet. Its a mindset that 'the blind' have this little person presumably in
suspended animation in their wardrobe. Basically the only thing wrong is the
eyes no longer work and to me its such a simple fix for the supplier of any
printed item to put it into an accessible format its just pure lack of
thought or laziness that created the problem in the first place.
Brian

On 15/01/2013 12:20, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:28:10 AM UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
Further, if Bill wrote it he must have the text of it, so maybe he is being

particularly lazy and non inclusive today?
Why don't you just print it and ask someone to read it out instead of moaning?

Bill


hmmm.

some people have very high standards in their own area of expertise but
not all that high in others.

On 15/01/2013 18:05, Clem Dye wrote:
On 15/01/2013 16:57, Brian Gaff wrote:
Because I have then lost my independence which is something I value
greatly,
and I'd be waiting till next Tuesday to get anyone to do it. If its a
really
good printout then I'd scan it in and get an or to read it,
Unfortunately,
jpegs do not make good sources due to the dither effect of the
compression.
we still have the human brain much better than the machine for this
stuff.
I think I've made my case.
I will continue to point out this sort of issue as long as I'm on the
planet. Its a mindset that 'the blind' have this little person
presumably in
suspended animation in their wardrobe. Basically the only thing wrong
is the
eyes no longer work and to me its such a simple fix for the supplier
of any
printed item to put it into an accessible format its just pure lack of
thought or laziness that created the problem in the first place.
Brian

As someone who is nearly blind in one eye and has recently had cataract
surgery in the other (not for the faint-hearted if you only have one
goodish eye) it's unfortunate but sadly true that we live in a sighted
world. Those with disabilities will always be a second consideration
because we fall outside of the norms that most people enjoy. I certainly
sympathise with those like myself who are disadvantaged, but the fact
remains that computer technology can be used to negate some of the
problems that we face. Ideal? No, far from it. I live in constant fear
that secondary problems such as retinal detachment in my good eye will
isolate me from the world that I currently live in, at which point all
the technology in the world may not be able to restore my vision. That
all said, to call someone a c**t just because he or she uses a

**** is just an affectionate term of endearment with some people I know.

normally - ya **** is OK but if its just OK **** them you might be
about to get a kicking. But then again it all depends on the inflection.

wrote:
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:28:10 AM UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
Further, if Bill wrote it he must have the text of it, so maybe he
is being

particularly lazy and non inclusive today?
Why don't you just print it and ask someone to read it out instead of
moaning?

I think that's an appalling response. I'm sure Brian likes to be as
independant as possible and having to rely on folk to read stuff out to him
isn't something that he'll likely want to do more than absolutely necessary.

As he says, you probably have the text somewhere, why not put it up or email
it to him? If you don't, just say so but I think his request was entirely
reasonable.

Tim

Mark Carver wrote:

Much of that though is due to shortcomings of your D-Sat receiver,
and not D-Sat as a platform per se ?

I don't agree. How can any two-channel receiver update the EPG
continuously in the background without using a third LNB?

--
SteveT

Michael Chare wrote:

Exactly, my Linux PVR does not have this problem, and much of the epg
data that it uses comes from the Internet.

But surely that's because it doesn't show the proper Freesat EPG. You
can't get that from the Internet, can you?

--
SteveT

In message , Clem Dye
writes
On 15/01/2013 15:28, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:52:37 PM UTC, A&R Man wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:20:05 -0800 (PST),

wrote:



On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:28:10 AM UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:

Further, if Bill wrote it he must have the text of it, so maybe he
being



particularly lazy and non inclusive today?

Why don't you just print it and ask someone to read it out instead
moaning?



Bill

What a **** you are, Bill.

Now now, be fair. I have every sympathy with Brian but other things
he's said in the group prove that he's extremely resourceful, and can
accomplish a remarkable range of tasks. I'm certain he could print a
page and OCR it with a handheld thing, or simply import the jpg into
an OCR program in his computer, or as I said wait until someone pops
in and get them to read it.

I'm sorry to say this, but the fact is that every single time a bit
of non-editable text appears Brian complains about it. The fact is,
non-editable text is always going to appear so Brian would be better
off finding a way to read it. The constant moaning about it gets
dangerously close to an abuse of his position as a disabled person in
my opinion. Adaptations for disability can only go so far. We can make
sure new buildings have disabled lavatories and easy access but we
can't expect the whole world to be modified to suit every single disability.

Pandering to the disabled when their they are just being lazy and
their requests are unreasonable doesn't do them any favours; quite the
opposite in fact, in the long run. To help someone rise above their
disability it's best to listen to a request and then consider if the
person could possibly accomplish the task themselves. I speak as
someone whose main job is to look after two disabled people.

Bill

The default image was a little on the small side for me to read
comfortably -- I could read it -- but I have this thing called a
computer that allows me to select images and re-scale them. I dunno if
this technology will catch-on though.


Clem


Ctrl + will zoom.
--
Ian

On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:35:11 +0000, Ian wrote:

The default image was a little on the small side for me to read
comfortably -- I could read it -- but I have this thing called a
computer that allows me to select images and re-scale them. I dunno if
this technology will catch-on though.


Clem


Ctrl + will zoom.

In Opera there's a little magnifying-glass symbol (ICR if it's 'native' or a
user.js) if the image is less than full screen, so 1 click and the image was
big enough to read. Using + (no Ctrl needed in Opera) didn't actually do
anything - I didn't try it in Firefox.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

The notion that the whole nation will turn to broadcasters for
information, should there be some crisis is also becoming out of
date. The young do not instinctively turn to TV or radio for info on
catastrophes, they pick up their smart phones, and use social media.

Actually, I had the impression that people *do* still 'switch on the
TV or radio' when serious and dramatic national events occur. My
memory is unreliable, but I thought this was reported in places like
the R4 'Media Show' in recent years.

The culture I'm picking up, is that the young don't trust
'institutions', and what they say. Now, while the poor old Beeb, might
get unfairly tarred with the same brush as News International or
Barclays Bank, I actually think on balance that's a healthy thing ?

I'd agree. However I also think people need to 'distrust' much of what
appears via 'social media', etc. OSAF rules. (Opinion Stated As Fact.)
And 'crowd sourced' material like wikis are easily subverted or injected
with tosh. By default, treat all as akin to 'Official Government
Statement'... 8-]

You might interpret that as the start of social insubordination, and a
route to anarchy, or in a more positive light as not accepting
everything at face value, and questioning what older folk accept and
take from granted ?

Both. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Steve Thackery wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:

Much of that though is due to shortcomings of your D-Sat receiver,
and not D-Sat as a platform per se ?

I don't agree. How can any two-channel receiver update the EPG
continuously in the background without using a third LNB?


There's nothing different about a two tuner D-Sat PVR, (with each tuner
fed from its own LNB) and a two tuner DTT PVR, is there ?

Freesat (and Sky) D-Sat has the luxury of a dedicated transponder that
carries only the EPG data. If the D-Sat has a free tuner, than that
tuner sits on the EPG t/p and caches the data.

DTT does not have a dedicated mux full of EPG data. The EPG data is
'trickle' fed on all six muxes, (and synchronised between them too)
However AFAIK the same trick is also performed on D-Sat, on each
transponder, so if both tuners are engaged with recording, the EPG data
is still available. The only difference is the D-Sat EPG is larger than
the DTT one.

The Humax Freesat box is crap with 'on demand' EPG loading, but as I say
that's a shortcoming of the box, not the platform.

I've got the same box, I don't bother with the 'Guide' button. To view
the EPG, push 'Schedule' followed by the red button.

All that said, I've always managed to set a recording, without having
to wait for the data to load, and recording failures are very low,
normally one or two a year.