3 ms·

A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. How does this help startups, which are often b

A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. How does this help startups, which are often building things speculatively? That is, they're not even completely sure if the things they're working on will pan out for anyone. Your solution is just to hobble everyone, and that strikes me as incredibly unjust. Everyone is born with different abilities. Some of us are able to do some things, and others of us are not. That's just a fact about the world, and it will always be that way. Where we differ is what that fact means. You are relying on the premise that those of us that possess a given ability are born in hock, in a sense, to those that do not possess that ability. It's exactly this idea that I don't accept. Now, I don't mean that we shouldn't have audible crosswalks on public streets, wheelchair ramps on government buildings, etc. Nor do I mean that it's wrong for people to privately work on assistive technologies, such as screen readers, closed captioning, etc., if that's something they wish to do. What I am against is the idea that I, or anyone else, owes part of their lives (creative works are a huge part of a person's life) to redress someone else's misfortune, inability or disability, which they had absolutely no hand in creating themselves. In the debate on "equality," some say that the only way to make us all truly equal is to hobble the able. Some people find a statement like that implausible, but after reading what you say, I have yet another data point that confirms it.

dalke 13y ago
You have completely misunderstood my meaning. Q: How do we get rid of [slavery|child labor|80 hour work weeks|polluting the waterways] when no one else does? It will be horrible for our industries! A: Convince the other countries to get rid of [slavery|child labor|80 hour work weeks|polluting the waterways] as well. My answer is similar - if Norway's desire to support the human rights of the disabled is so burdensome that business is no longer possible, then a possible solution is to convince other countries to also support the rights of their disabled populations. "often building things speculatively" It really depends on what they are building, does it not? If it's the Norwegian equivalent of Amazon, with 150 people working on the project then that's different than a group of 4 undergraduates with a bright idea. In the main thread, I pointed out that the actual Norwegian laws has exceptions for when there's undue burden. This parallels equivalent ADA exceptions in the US. (In the US: "Employers are not required to provide accommodation where doing so would impose an undue hardship on the business". In Norway, "There is an exemption from the requirement for universal design, if this causes an "undue burden" for the business, see § 13 subsection.") Almost certainly small speculative startups will not be subject to this law, if it's anything like the ADA. To resolve that will require reading the Norwegian laws directly, which is beyond my powers. (What little I've found says that they are still working on the details.) I'm hardly calling for a Harrison Bergeron solution. We've had the ADA in the US for 24 years and that hasn't hobbled the able. It's has required companies and owners to spend money (making money is a huge part of a person's life) to redress someone else's disabilities. Many people don't like the ADA for exactly the reasons you don't. It's still the law. I pointed to successful lawsuits in the US which have established that web sites in the US are subject to the ADA requirements. I pointed to the rule making process which has started to establish what that means. Something equivalent will be happening in the US, either through regulations or piecemeal through lawsuits. Do you want your startup to be surprised by an ADA lawsuit someday? Or would you rather a set of rules where you can figure out when to start with ADA support, once your startup is successful enough?

dalke 13y ago

You have completely misunderstood my meaning. Q: How do we get rid of [slavery|child labor|80 hour work weeks|polluting the waterways] when no one else does? It will be horrible for our industries! A: Convince the other countries to get rid of [slavery|child labor|80 hour work weeks|polluting the waterways] as well. My answer is similar - if Norway's desire to support the human rights of the disabled is so burdensome that business is no longer possible, then a possible solution is to convince other countries to also support the rights of their disabled populations. "often building things speculatively" It really depends on what they are building, does it not? If it's the Norwegian equivalent of Amazon, with 150 people working on the project then that's different than a group of 4 undergraduates with a bright idea. In the main thread, I pointed out that the actual Norwegian laws has exceptions for when there's undue burden. This parallels equivalent ADA exceptions in the US. (In the US: "Employers are not required to provide accommodation where doing so would impose an undue hardship on the business". In Norway, "There is an exemption from the requirement for universal design, if this causes an "undue burden" for the business, see § 13 subsection.") Almost certainly small speculative startups will not be subject to this law, if it's anything like the ADA. To resolve that will require reading the Norwegian laws directly, which is beyond my powers. (What little I've found says that they are still working on the details.) I'm hardly calling for a Harrison Bergeron solution. We've had the ADA in the US for 24 years and that hasn't hobbled the able. It's has required companies and owners to spend money (making money is a huge part of a person's life) to redress someone else's disabilities. Many people don't like the ADA for exactly the reasons you don't. It's still the law. I pointed to successful lawsuits in the US which have established that web sites in the US are subject to the ADA requirements. I pointed to the rule making process which has started to establish what that means. Something equivalent will be happening in the US, either through regulations or piecemeal through lawsuits. Do you want your startup to be surprised by an ADA lawsuit someday? Or would you rather a set of rules where you can figure out when to start with ADA support, once your startup is successful enough?