4 ms·

This isn't an issue, its a feature. You live in a society so you plan around to serve that society. If you're not serving a large portion of your population the

This isn't an issue, its a feature. You live in a society so you plan around to serve that society. If you're not serving a large portion of your population then you're going to be forced to. This is no different than outlawing racial discrimination.

edoo 7y ago
Completely incorrect. Denying someone service is completely different than them being unable to access your business because you can't afford to build out the accommodations. The constitution first and foremost guarantees freedom. Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery.
- thereare5lights 7y ago
  Better tell that to the people that maintain jury duty, or the Selective Service
- lftl 7y ago
  So I take it you're opposed to the ADA in general?
  - wtallis 7y ago
    Probably also opposed to safety regulations like having a sprinkler system if your business is in a building over a certain size. After all, building those are way more expensive than wheelchair ramps, and sometimes even more expensive than web devs who know how to make an accessible page.
  - edoo 7y ago
    Absolutely except for federal buildings. The powers not expressly given to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states. At worse it should be a states rights issue with each state deciding their own way.
    - jakelazaroff 7y ago
      > The powers not expressly given to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states. I don't understand why you're making a legal argument now when the root of your opinion is a moral one ("Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery"). It sounds like the states' rights argument is just a convenient legal pretext for what you really want, which is the freedom to discriminate against disabled people.
      - edoo 7y ago
        Not going out of your way to accommodate someone is discrimination? Nice newspeak. Where do you draw your arbitrary line of totalitarianism? Are you discriminating against people with ADHD for not having a clean version of the website for them? What about the 33+ languages in this country? Are you discriminating by not supporting them? Do you have to have a website for each religion?
    - loteck 7y ago
      You should check out the commerce clause of the Constitution, I think you're in for a big surprise!
    - aaomidi 7y ago
      Do you have any disability that limits you being able to use services accessible to everyone else? Do you know anyone close to you that you can comfortably ask what limits and bumps there are out there for them to be able to comfortably use the internet?
- vertex-four 7y ago
  You’re not forced to work at gunpoint - you could’ve chosen not to build the website at all.
arvinsim 7y ago
Better tell that to the business owners and managers, not the developers.
- pseudalopex 7y ago
  The Supreme Court just did.
pakitan 7y ago
> This is no different than outlawing racial discrimination. Yes, it is. Racial discrimination requires a special effort not to serve specific part of the population. Accessibility regulations ask you for investing time and money, that you may not be able to afford, in order to serve a minority of the population, that might not even be interested in your product.
- oarsinsync 7y ago
  When the web and HTML pages first started up, they were all designed in such a way that accessibility software would have been able to navigate. Since, a lot of time and money has been invested in making the web less accessible. Not all discrimination requires a special effort to not serve a specific part of the community. See Google Photo's gaffe identifying a black skinned person as a gorilla. This is discrimination through a lack of consideration or effort. A similar process has occurred with accessibility (and more) on the web. A lot of time and investment has occurred to 'improve' the web for specific groups and interests, without considering the impact on others.
ibeckermayer 7y ago
You've asserted several things but haven't made an argument as to why those assertions are justified. At the end of your first paragraph, you've jumped from making assertions to making violent threats.

edoo 7y ago

Completely incorrect. Denying someone service is completely different than them being unable to access your business because you can't afford to build out the accommodations. The constitution first and foremost guarantees freedom. Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery.

thereare5lights 7y ago
Better tell that to the people that maintain jury duty, or the Selective Service
lftl 7y ago
So I take it you're opposed to the ADA in general?
- wtallis 7y ago
  Probably also opposed to safety regulations like having a sprinkler system if your business is in a building over a certain size. After all, building those are way more expensive than wheelchair ramps, and sometimes even more expensive than web devs who know how to make an accessible page.
- edoo 7y ago
  Absolutely except for federal buildings. The powers not expressly given to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states. At worse it should be a states rights issue with each state deciding their own way.
  - jakelazaroff 7y ago
    > The powers not expressly given to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states. I don't understand why you're making a legal argument now when the root of your opinion is a moral one ("Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery"). It sounds like the states' rights argument is just a convenient legal pretext for what you really want, which is the freedom to discriminate against disabled people.
    - edoo 7y ago
      Not going out of your way to accommodate someone is discrimination? Nice newspeak. Where do you draw your arbitrary line of totalitarianism? Are you discriminating against people with ADHD for not having a clean version of the website for them? What about the 33+ languages in this country? Are you discriminating by not supporting them? Do you have to have a website for each religion?
  - loteck 7y ago
    You should check out the commerce clause of the Constitution, I think you're in for a big surprise!
  - aaomidi 7y ago
    Do you have any disability that limits you being able to use services accessible to everyone else? Do you know anyone close to you that you can comfortably ask what limits and bumps there are out there for them to be able to comfortably use the internet?
vertex-four 7y ago
You’re not forced to work at gunpoint - you could’ve chosen not to build the website at all.

arvinsim 7y ago

Better tell that to the business owners and managers, not the developers.

pseudalopex 7y ago
The Supreme Court just did.

pakitan 7y ago

> This is no different than outlawing racial discrimination. Yes, it is. Racial discrimination requires a special effort not to serve specific part of the population. Accessibility regulations ask you for investing time and money, that you may not be able to afford, in order to serve a minority of the population, that might not even be interested in your product.

oarsinsync 7y ago
When the web and HTML pages first started up, they were all designed in such a way that accessibility software would have been able to navigate. Since, a lot of time and money has been invested in making the web less accessible. Not all discrimination requires a special effort to not serve a specific part of the community. See Google Photo's gaffe identifying a black skinned person as a gorilla. This is discrimination through a lack of consideration or effort. A similar process has occurred with accessibility (and more) on the web. A lot of time and investment has occurred to 'improve' the web for specific groups and interests, without considering the impact on others.

ibeckermayer 7y ago

You've asserted several things but haven't made an argument as to why those assertions are justified. At the end of your first paragraph, you've jumped from making assertions to making violent threats.