Anyone who suggests that open source software shouldn't be allowed in a secure

environment doesn't understand the concept of peer review and "we have nothing

to hide - look at our software and judge for yourself (I don't mean the

average user, I mean security experts) whether it's secure or not".

Proprietary software can hide all sorts of bugs and backdoors the vendor wants

to behind the cloak of secrecy.  That's not the same as security.

Antony.

On Sunday 25 August 2019 at 13:38:39, kelby carlson wrote:

> Hi, everyone,

>

> I hope this isn't too off-topic. I recently heard an argument that NVDA is

> bad for blind prospect's in employment because it is the "dumbed down"

> solution. The person arguing this elaborated, saying that NVDA is not

> customizable/flexible enough (too chatty"), that it was not able to be

> scripted as easily, it didn't work well with as much proprietary software,

> and that it wouldn't be allowed on secure environments due to being open

> source.

>

> So my question is this: how many people here use NVDA for work, and is

> there a notable dilerence in level of usability with JAWS?

>

> Also, does NVDA have a skim reading feature like JAWS?

--

If you can smile when all about you things are going wrong, you must have

someone in mind to take the blame.

                                                   Please reply to the list;

                                                         please *don't* CC me.