Blind Faith: The DOJ Cracks Down On E-Readers

I'll be honest. When I first saw this story, I found it hard to believe that the DOJ would sue the Sacramento Library system on an ADA violation for ditributing e-readers without braile features. Surely it's one of those "right-wing media" stories taking some bad Big Gov't facts and turning them up to 11, right? Well, the Sac Bee has picked it up, so here we go:

The U.S. Justice Department says it has reached a settlement with the Sacramento (California) Public Library over a trial program the library was conducting that let patrons borrow Barnes and Noble NOOK e-book readers. 

DOJ and the National Federation of the Blind objected to the program on grounds that blind people could not use the NOOK e-readers for technological reasons. 

The Justice Department said the settlement is aimed at stopping discrimination: “Emerging technologies like e-readers are changing the way we interact with the world around us and we need to ensure that people with disabilities are not excluded from the programs where these devices are used,” said Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez in a news release.

This is, of course, absurd. Not only that, no blind person had complained to the gov't. This was purely a ADA-lawsuit where attorneys and a single plaintiff searching for "harm." In this case, the attorneys were working for the gov't and a non-profit that is really an NGO.

A DOJ official told CNSNews.com it interviewed a woman who could not participate in the library's e-reader program due to her disability and concluded that the program had violated the ADA. 

Amy Calhoun, an Electronic Resources Librarian at the Sacramento Public Library who helped launch the ebook reader project, said she was unaware of any objections from a blind person regarding the program. “I have not heard of a specific complaint directly from a patron,” she told CNSNews.com. “But I do know that patrons who are part of the statewide Braille and talking-book program do get in touch with us for audio books.” 

The Sacramento Public Library Authority, which operates 28 libraries, partnered with the book store chain to provide at least one NOOK e-book reader to each of its libraries, pre-loaded with roughly 20 books in all genres. 

The library describes the program as a “pilot project,” and it requires patrons to fill out a feedback survey as the program works through its initial stages. 

But the Justice Department says a state or local government program that excludes people with disabilities violates the ADA, regardless of whether it is a “pilot” program.

And, of course, the sorts of e-readers that would be ADA-compliant are much more expensive, and produced by different companies. Want to bet if Barnes & Noble tried to produce its own "approved" readers that they would be fending off patent lawsuits?

No one was doing anything wrong here, but the gov't and its allies in the ADA lobbying complex got their pelt anyway.

We Have The Technology: Romney Was Right To Be Amazed By Touch_Screen Sandwich Shop

You may have heard about MSNBC's failed attempt at editing a video of Mitt Romney exclaiming over a touch-screen at a Wawa (no I'd never heard of this chain before, either) to make him look like an out-of-touch plutocrat. Turns out that the touch-screen system at Wawa is very impressive, and is worth discussing in a "what a world we live in" kind of way.

I live in South Jersey, where we have more Wawas per square mile than any place on earth. They were a regional milk provider who started selling sandwiches and coffee, and became a kind of upscale 7-11. It’s a huge success story. They make a damn good sub and a better cup of coffee than Starbucks at half the price. 

The thing is, their touchscreen ordering system is a great example innovative tech in daily use. It’s a brilliant, relatively recent application of touch screen technology for custom food orders. Other stores may have something similar, but I’ve never seen one in common use anywhere other than Wawas. (My Shop Rite has something similar for ordering cold cuts.)  I doubt very much Mitchell has either. 

I’m still impressed by the panels, which work well under heavy use and are designed in such a way that technophobes can navigate them with ease. They’re adjustable, easy-to-read, and responsive. You can pick from a wide selection of condiments and toppings, and even choose the amount of mayo or olive oil, add bacon or extra cheese, choose to have it toasted, and order things on the side. Automating this element of the process also eliminates errors in orders and makes the entire process more efficient. It’s a good system. It must have been a risk for Wawa, and it deserves a shoutout. 

Honestly? I get a little thrill every time I use it, but then again I’m a technonerd. I actually like Romney a bit more for showing this gee-whiz side of his usually robotic self. We should be amazed by amazing things. I like a man with a sense of wonder. When did wonder become a quality to be mocked?

You know, it just occurred to me that the "out of touch millionaire gee-whizzing over technology" cliche makes no sense. The wealthy are often the first ones who can afford to buy gadgets and high-tech gizmos before the rest of us slobs. Don't you  think that Mitt Romney's house with, among other things, its car elevator, might have some pretty snazzy technical elements? 


Romney probably has had experience with high-tech, both in his personal life and his business life, that the rest of us can only imagine. He has a great deal of respect and enthusiasm for technological progress. He is certainly not ignorant or out of touch. 

Technical Delays

Just hooked up my Apple TV and I'm, uh, busy. Be back later after the Free Will Daughter has had an Elmo session on YouTube.

UPDATE: well, on the one hand, Apple TV is pretty impressive. It practically sets itself up. The platform is simple and very intuitive. It's great to finally be able to watch YouTube on a big TV screen, rather than on my laptop. I was also pleasantly surprised to see how many radio stations are on it (there are dozens of genres, with hundreds of stations for each type of music). And, I can use my I-pad to play videos, music, etc.

On the other hand, entering information into the search box is a little laborious. You have to scroll around with the remote and enter numbers and letters that way. Shouldn't "internet on the TV" have a keyboard instead of a goofy little remote? More important, shouldn't "internet on the TV" have more than what Apple is willing to give you? Netflix is there, but no Amazon. MLB and NBA, but no NFL or NHL. And so on.

All in all, a great tool, but it's only a supplement. No one is going to cut the cable cord after buying Apple TV.

The Can't Do Society: San Francisco's War On Tech

For all of the "we are the future" rhetoric that we hear from SF politicos, the truth is that the City That Doesn't Know How is much better at throwing up roadblocks, rather than getting out of the way of the spread of innovative technology:

San Francisco boasts an enviable roster of high-tech companies such as Zynga, Twitter and Salesforce.com. It's home to legions of tech workers serving companies throughout the Bay Area. And it's got a cutting-edge culture that has helped the city become a tech capital.

But beneath those credentials is a city that has a track record of opposition to companies wanting to expand or upgrade the technology infrastructure, brought on by concerned neighborhood groups.

Over the past few years, San Francisco has been in the middle of protracted fights over cellular antennas, a stalled deployment of AT&T's broadband and TV service, and a failed city Wi-Fi network.

Even Apple CEO Steve Jobs brought the issue to the fore last month when he said during a press conference that it takes a cellular antenna site three years to get approved in San Francisco compared with three weeks in Texas.

Some city and business leaders worry the trend could undercut San Francisco's reputation, which may eventually harm the city's ability to attract and retain companies and residents.

Embarrassingly, a lot of the opposition is driven by the possibility of health problems arising from cell phones and cell phone towers. This from the progressive party of Science and Reason.

Of course, the real reason behind delays is more likely to be NIMBY opponents to cell phone towers in their neighborhood. San Francisco has a large number of cranks and gadflies, all of whom seem to have gone to law school, or are at least conversant with the City's byzantine planning procedures. It's a good example of how a determined minority of dedicated activists can obtain more from the political process than the thousands of, shall we say, "regular" people who don't have time to go to Planning Commission meetings, and just want their iPhones to work.