| ▲ | gmueckl 2 hours ago | |
You have the right starting point, but the wrong conclusion. Government services need to be inclusive of everybody. But you simply cannot build technical solutions that put technical requirements on devices owned by the users in a way that the service is sufficiently inclusive. That is just a fact. If you want to be critical of the outcome on compatibility grounds, forcing a grind to increase technical compatibility is the wrong thing to ask for. That must necessarily always leave some people behind. The only honest alternative positions on that front are (a) the government issues the tech to everybody itself or (b) the government doesn't build advanced systems at all. The German government offices rely on a lot of quaint-looking paper based processes, but they have one thing going for them: working through them can be done with pen and paper - tools that are available for cheap and broadly compatible. It's probably not such a bad thing after all? | ||
| ▲ | class4behavior an hour ago | parent [-] | |
Inclusivity is secondary here. Moreover, it's just fallacious to argue the nation has to give up on its own rights and principles and be content with whatever the market provides. | ||