▲ | IanCal 3 months ago | ||||||||||||||||
The problem is that having that rule results in those 1%s always being excluded. It's probably worth just going back and looking at the arguments for laws around accessibility. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | mst 3 months ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Yeah, every time I try and figure out an approach that could've avoided this being covered by the rules without making it easy for everybody to screw over deaf people entirely I end up coming to the conclusion that there probably isn't one. I'm somewhat tempted to think that whoever sued berkeley and had the whole thing taken down in this specific case was just being a knob, but OTOH there's issues even with that POV in terms of letting precedents be set that will de facto still become "screw over deaf people entirely" even when everybody involved is doing their best to act in good faith. Hopefully speech-to-text and text-to-speech will make the question moot in the medium term. | |||||||||||||||||
|