5 ms·

This problem unfortunately applies to a lot of remote access software, particularly when the web browser is the client. I know of one company that switched to

This problem unfortunately applies to a lot of remote access software, particularly when the web browser is the client. I know of one company that switched to Web VNC for accessing a specific piece of software. They had a lot of offices and the software was expensive (paid per machine). This way, they could switch to a much smaller number of licenses, letting any employee connect from anywhere and wait in line if necessary. A blind person has lost a job over this.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
digitallyfree 5y ago
I'm not sure if remote access programs (web browser or not) even support screen readers on the client, especially since many of those render the entire desktop server-side and send it back to the client as an image or video. A possible option may be to run the screen reader on the remote desktop itself if that's possible.
- mwcampbell 5y ago
  > A possible option may be to run the screen reader on the remote desktop itself if that's possible. For generic remote desktop access, that's what we have to do. But piping accessibility information (in its generic form, not pre-rendered as speech) to the client side in that case is much harder than it would be for this Chromium-based remote browser. (I know this from relevant experience during my time on the Windows accessibility team at Microsoft.)
yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
> A blind person has lost a job over this. IANAL, but in at least the US and Europe that sounds like the easiest lawsuit of their life
- mwcampbell 5y ago
  You're the third person on this thread to say that. Please check out the responses to the other two: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28027986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28027986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028116
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    I read those "just sue them" responses as coming from people who have never even talked to a lawyer except when going through the paperwork of buying a house, much less been a party to actual litigation. Companies keep lawyers on retainer to fight suits like this.They have resources of time and money to easily bankrupt someone with a disability who has just lost a job, and typically it won't even cost the company anything above what their normal retainer fees run.
    - cronix 5y ago
      It is also extremely difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were let go due to the disability, especially if there is only a single case in the company and not a track record to follow unless there is a blatant email along the lines of "they're blind, let's get rid of them."
      - ithinkso 5y ago
        This is a common misconception, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is only needed in criminal cases. In civil cases most often preponderance of the evidence (i.e. 'more likely that not') is enough
        kwdc 5y ago
        This is an indication of the need for more people to get actual legal advice before assuming anything legal.
        cratermoon 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

digitallyfree 5y ago

I'm not sure if remote access programs (web browser or not) even support screen readers on the client, especially since many of those render the entire desktop server-side and send it back to the client as an image or video. A possible option may be to run the screen reader on the remote desktop itself if that's possible.

mwcampbell 5y ago
> A possible option may be to run the screen reader on the remote desktop itself if that's possible. For generic remote desktop access, that's what we have to do. But piping accessibility information (in its generic form, not pre-rendered as speech) to the client side in that case is much harder than it would be for this Chromium-based remote browser. (I know this from relevant experience during my time on the Windows accessibility team at Microsoft.)

yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago

> A blind person has lost a job over this. IANAL, but in at least the US and Europe that sounds like the easiest lawsuit of their life

mwcampbell 5y ago
You're the third person on this thread to say that. Please check out the responses to the other two: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28027986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28027986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028116
- cratermoon 5y ago
  I read those "just sue them" responses as coming from people who have never even talked to a lawyer except when going through the paperwork of buying a house, much less been a party to actual litigation. Companies keep lawyers on retainer to fight suits like this.They have resources of time and money to easily bankrupt someone with a disability who has just lost a job, and typically it won't even cost the company anything above what their normal retainer fees run.
  - cronix 5y ago
    It is also extremely difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were let go due to the disability, especially if there is only a single case in the company and not a track record to follow unless there is a blatant email along the lines of "they're blind, let's get rid of them."
    - ithinkso 5y ago
      This is a common misconception, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is only needed in criminal cases. In civil cases most often preponderance of the evidence (i.e. 'more likely that not') is enough
      - kwdc 5y ago
        This is an indication of the need for more people to get actual legal advice before assuming anything legal.
      - cratermoon 5y ago