Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in
  • Preferences

Comments: 111 +-   Intel's New E-Reader For the Visually Impaired on Tuesday November 10, @05:26PM

Posted by kdawson on Tuesday November 10, @05:26PM
from the tell-me-a-story dept.
books
intel
hardware
serverguy writes "Intel will be releasing a win for all visually impaired members of society, a new device called the Intel Reader. It allows visually impaired people to take a snapshot of a newspaper, book, or magazine and have it read back to them. It's estimated that in the US alone there are as many as 55 million people who could make use of such a device. It comes at hefty price though: the paperback-sized device costs $1,499. The device contains a 5-megapixel camera and is powered by a Linux OCR system that converts text into spoken words. The device can hold up to 2GB of data, which would equate to around 600 snapshots. In addition to reading text, the device can also play back audio books in a number of supported formats such as MP3 and WAV. The Intel Reader is expected to be released next Tuesday." The device won't be speedy: "Intel says it takes about 30 seconds to process each page of text... It took... about 30 minutes to scan in the pages of a 250-page book and then one hour to process them."
story

Related Stories

Submission: Intel's New E-Reader for the Visually Impaired by serverguy (1650163)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Intel's New E-Reader For the Visually Impaired 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • The raw features somehow make the $1500 seem odd. The admittedly unwieldy equivalent built out of commodity parts is basically a 5-megapixel camera that transfers its data over USB (can be had for under $100 these days), and a netbook (~$300), for a total of ~$400 of hardware. What's the extra $1100 for? The integration into a nice portable package? Development costs of a proprietary OCR/voicesynth pipeline?

    • I still laugh at the for the blind part. Are the blind expected to know what page they're on with which to have read?

      "I really wonder what page 47 says".

    • Re:is the cost from portability/integration? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by theaveng (1243528) on Tuesday November 10, @06:01PM (#30053048)

      The extra $1100 is for Intel to pay their legal defense fund when the Authors' Guild sues them for violating their authors' "performance rights".

      I'm serious. The Guild has already sued Amazon for creating a Kindle that reads books out loud.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by schon (31600)

        When I was at the 2001 Canadian copyright consultation, I spoke with a publisher about something just like this.

        We were arguing about DMCA-like amendments to copyright law. His position was that he should be able to prohibit *anything* that was capable of reading an e-book, because it would infringe his copyright. Even if that device would read ebooks to blind people. He told me that if he wanted to publish a version for blind people, he would, and that if he didn't, nobody should be allowed to make some

        • Or cold-hearted. Doesn't the Americans with Disabilities Act require books to be published in braille form, if a blind person requests it?

          Also his attitude is not too surprising. There used to be a company that purchased perfectly-legal DVDs of movies, removed the objectionable scenes, and then sold the DVD (plus $10 to cover the service) to families. That company got sued, and the directors argued if familes want clean versions, they will provide them. Well that company is now gone, but I don't see any

          • My understanding is that scanning a book that you own to put it through a brailler or into Kuzweil software is specifically protected by law.

          • Doesn't the Americans with Disabilities Act require books to be published in braille form, if a blind person requests it?

            I have no idea. I do know, however, that as a US law, it's not binding on Canadians. :)

            • Doesn't the Americans with Disabilities Act require books to be published in braille form, if a blind person requests it?

              I have no idea. I do know, however, that as a US law, it's not binding on Canadians. :)

              So, it's only legally required to be in English braille and French braille? ;}

              (Please don't hurt me, I'm only joking!)

    • The NYtimes did an interesting article on something similar to this, it was about the exorbitant cost of text to speech devices for the speaking impaired compared to simple consumer solutions like the iphone.

      Heres the article, its quite interesting:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/technology/15speech.html [nytimes.com]

    • The admittedly unwieldy equivalent built out of commodity parts is basically a 5-megapixel camera that transfers its data over USB (can be had for under $100 these days), and a netbook (~$300), for a total of ~$400 of hardware. What's the extra $1100 for?

      Unfortunately rip-off pricing is pretty much guaranteed in accessibility devices. Just go compare Kurzweil 1000 [sightandsound.co.uk] with similar commodity scanning apps.

    • Maybe the big picture is that Intel has not been successful, generally, at making products other than processors and chipsets and motherboards.

      Intel had a consumer division which was closed. I don't know the reason for closing the division, but all the Intel consumer products I reviewed had major flaws.

      Right now I'm trying to find a graphics driver for an Intel chipset motherboard. The Intel web site is amazingly complicated to use.

      Generally, Intel employees say they are unhappy with CEO Otellini.

    • The raw features somehow make the $1500 seem odd.

      The geek can hack out a gadget and call it an aid for the disabled.

      That doesn't mean that any public or private agency will be able to buy one for their clients.

      Without proof that the thing actually works as described and has real and substantial benefits.

      The first question that needs to be answered is how easy will it be for a visually - and perhaps physically - impaired reader to use the camera.

      I have my own doubts about this one.

      • No, in that case it would list for $15,000. =]

        • In all seriousness though, I think the grandparent poster might be right. If it's designed as a single-purpose device specifically to assist people with a disability, it goes into a whole different market which might include insurance coverage.

  • The N900 seems like it ought to have enough horsepower to do this job, perhaps slightly slower but I don't see why the device can't be reading and scanning at the same time. N900 has a 5MP, I'm sure a future iPhone will have an acceptable camera... et cetera. I'm curious if there's audio feedback to tell you if you're correctly framing the page.

    • Re:Seems like a future iPhone, N900, etc. app (Score:5, Interesting)

      by HTH NE1 (675604) on Tuesday November 10, @05:38PM (#30052768)

      The N900 seems like it ought to have enough horsepower to do this job

      Unfortunately, since an N900 can do other things as well, disability coverage won't pay for it. Insurers demand assistive devices be single-function, even if the devices have to be crippled to comply.

      • Will it pay for the software, at least? The devices themselves are available as low as $549 (newegg maybe? geeks? I forget, probably the former) without a contract. I imagine you could get one pretty reasonably with a plan. Lots of people have cellphones these days, and it has a keyboard so it could conceivably be made fairly accessible if it isn't already. (not to mention that whole running Linux thing)

    • I'm curious if there's audio feedback to tell you if you're correctly framing the page.

      I sure hope so...with these figures

      The device won't be speedy: "Intel says it takes about 30 seconds to process each page of text

      I'd sure be pissed to wait 30 seconds only to hear "Page 3 of 7"

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by dingen (958134)
      Actually, this isn't even a thing of the future. I know a blind person who already has an application which does exactly this on his Nokia phone. He can use it to read signs on the street, letters in his mailbox and basically any text he captures with the camera on his phone.
  • I see this device somehow being turned into something that pirates audio books, or spies on people.
    • How? This is basically a camera that turns text to speech. It doesn't record audio books or anything, and I think it should be well within your rights to have an audio copy of books you own or even library books especially if you can't normally use books due to a disability. And spying on people? Because a blind person is going to go up to someone and digitise something?

  • oh, bother. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by adolf (21054) <adolf@phreaker.net> on Tuesday November 10, @05:44PM (#30052828)

    Now we have yet another device waiting to be demonized by the copyright nazis.

    • Putting DRM on a device built for the visually impaired? I don't see it.


      I'm going to hell.

      • Taking pictures of books, automatically OCR'ing them, while being portable, fairly quick, and having enough space to actually hold a useful volume of works: If you can't see the copyright issue here, then I guess you'll have to wait until some previously-non-digital printed works show up on TPB courtesy of this device for the sheer obviousness of it to shine through.

        I, for one, am all for it. But, then, I'm not the copyright Nazi I was referring to.

  • ASCAP will put a stop to this (Score:5, Funny)

    by tekrat (242117) on Tuesday November 10, @05:47PM (#30052870) Homepage Journal

    This device is a violation, and users will have to pay royalties for a public performance of a copyrighted work.

    #1) You are "copying" (aka pirating), when you take the snapshot.
    #2) The device then produces an audio public performance of the pirated work.

    It's illegal under copyright laws and the DMCA.

    • Copyright exceptions exist for the purpose of ensuring that people with disabilities can access print materials, etc... Printed works can be presented in alternative specialized formats (and voice rendering is one of those formats) without constituting a copyright violation. Check out bookshare.org... It's largely based on that.

  • Lawsuit over "performance royalties"? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tacarat (696339) on Tuesday November 10, @05:47PM (#30052872) Journal
    Didn't some group sue Amazon over the Kindle's ability to read text out loud? Is Intel next on the hit list due to this? I mean, for $1,500 you could hire some poor, out of work, minstrel to walk around with you and read articles in real time.

    Granted, they are a bit clunkier than what most airlines allow for as carry on luggage items, but still.

    • My Astak EZ-Reader Pro can read aloud some e-book formats.

    • You know, this has the potential to get rather interesting...

      Sony [playstation.com] is being sued by a blind fellow for not making their PS3 ADA compliant. Amazon was threatened [cnet.com] with a lawsuit by the Authors Guild for making their Kindle ADA compliant. Now Intel is taunting the Authors Guild by making a device with the express purpose of giving blind and otherwise visually impaired access to written works.

      • The problem with the kindle was largely that the text-to-speech functionality was a mainstream feature they were advertising (albeit in somewhat beta-fashion). In terms of accessibility to enable blind and visually impaired users to read the (otherwise) print materials on the kindle, no copyright violation etc would take place because that is covered under specific exceptions. Of course, the overall inaccessibility of the kindle makes that argument a bit hard to make.

        But with the Intel Reader being market

  • Maybe someone could build a device that lets you download the text of many national newspapers and can do a test-to-speach from that, instead of trying to use a crappy OCR application. Maybe if the sold it for a lot less, say $300, then it would be more affordable for blind people. They may not get many local newspapers, but for the price difference it might be a better fit for their income. It might be good if they could download the text of many books too. Could we interest a large bookseller, like Amazon

  • Software for Everyone (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Tuesday November 10, @05:59PM (#30053040) Homepage Journal

    I'm looking forward to someone unlocking the reader SW from its Linux-driven dedicated HW. I'd like my webcam to read my books and magazines to me at home.

    • I'd like my webcam to read my books and magazines to me at home.

      Make it also wash the dishes and vacuum the house and you got yourself a deal!

  • It was too small to see in the article, but I didn't see Braille on the buttons to tell a (True) visually impared person where to touch... Also, If they can't see to read, etc, how can they read the instructions that are on the screen?

    The thought is nice, but I don't think well thought out... Kinda like Braille on the ATM in the drive through lane at the bank, WTF?

    • Kinda like Braille on the ATM in the drive through lane at the bank, WTF?

      That's for a blind passenger who steps out of the vehicle and uses the ATM.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by kidblast (413235)

      The braille on the drive through bank ATMs is because it would be more expensive to create two types of buttons (braille and without) and know ahead of time where the ATM would be installed.

      This was discussed in Freakonomics IIRC.

    • Kinda like Braille on the ATM in the drive through lane at the bank, WTF?

      Judging by the way people drive on the Southern California freeways, it makes some sense. In fact, auto manufactures might consider doing the instrument panels on cars destined for this area in Braille.

  • This seems like crazy overkill. Benetech's program BookShare already provides the content in a format that traditional disabled accessible devices can handle. Plus it's all free for the content. This is probably the single most socially beneficial exception to the copyright law operating on the books right now. Any disabled person can have access to any copyrighted content at no charge through this program. Totally amazing:

    http://www.benetech.org/literacy/bookshare.shtml [benetech.org]

    • Your claim that bookshare is 'at no charge' isn't entirely accurate. Bookshare does charge a fee to its members, except for some specific user classes such as k12 students who have a reading disability.

  • I'm not too sure about the various degrees of visual impairment that would reduce visual acuity to the point where reading is no longer feasible, but...

    On the face of the matter, it seems someone ludicrous, or at the least ironic, that the device relies on a visually impaired individuals using a visual interface to interpret documents they cannot read. If they're impaired such that they cannot read, then will they easily be able to tell that the document is in focus? That the document is even entirely in

  • Screw that, they'll be an iPhone app that does this in about two months that also makes fart noises.

  • I have just got a proprietry scanner/ocr solution at work. I am limited in time but did investigate an open source solution for linux. But all i seemed to come accross was that "no OCR touches the commercial stuff". Indeed, some said, it can still be cheaper on a word/accuracy perspective to outsource to a typing service.

    What I have done is use the Searchable PDF output and used linux to 1. Produce a gif thumb of the PDF, and 2.) Use pdf2text to put in a db.

    The slowness frustrates me, I have much work

  • Just wait until the book publishers get wind of this.

    I predict pointless IP lawsuits up the ass :(

    Book publishers already claim using a screen reader for the blind is a copyright violation, text-to-voice on ebooks being illegal (I hope Amazon squashes that lawsuit instead of settles), and bypass some form of access control that doesn't exist and thus is a DMCA violation too.

    And this is why we can't have nice things

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by thewils (463314)

      But that's only for n=1 though. For larger values of n (approaching 250) the time comes down to around 7.2 seconds per page.

      That's according to the summary. Which might be wrong.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by MozeeToby (1163751)

        From the summary, 30 minutes to scan, 60 minutes to process. Comes to about 22 seconds actually; which, for all intents and purposes, is about 30 seconds.

    • How do the blind people know where to point the camera?

    • You do realise that there is such a thing as blindness right? And that there are enough of these blind people around to have just about every sign in a business have braille or raised lettering.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by John Whitley (6067)

      Aside from the fact that you're a troll, there's a deeper meme here worth debunking: that accessibility features are just for the "impaired".

      Gregg Vanderheiden gave the closing plenary talk at the SIGCHI [sigchi.org] 2001 conference. The subject was how creative integration of accessibility features can greatly improve functionality for all users, including examples of products originally designed for people with impairments which went on to wider commercial success. As an example of this kind of thinking, with portab

Search
Remember folks. Street lights timed for 35 mph are also timed for 70 mph. -- Jim Samuels

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.