4 ms·
Actually, all consumers of free online courses are charity cases. Deaf people are suing because MIT's and Harvard's largesse doesn't always include them.
by DocSavage 12y ago
Actually, all consumers of free online courses are charity cases. Deaf people are suing because MIT's and Harvard's largesse doesn't always include them.
- sp332 12y agoMIT and Harvard's "largess" is funded in part by tax money collected from deaf people. Anyway, donating to a a discriminatory cause is still discrimination even if it is generous or well-intentioned.
- SamReidHughes 12y agoWhat's the "discriminatory cause" you're talking about here?
- sp332 12y agoIt was hypothetical, but I guess you could say that donating courses only to non-deaf people is a cause.
- sadfaceunread 12y agoSo what about any charitable effort that discriminates on the basis of a protected class. If you can't do something for free to help one group without excluding some others no charity would be possible. Should MIT/Harvard intentionally avoid captioning? No. Should the government force them to use CCing? Hell no.
- sp332 12y agoYour charitable cause is putting some people at a disadvantage then. If your charitable effort somehow must discriminate, it should do it in favor of the less-privileged group.
- loco5niner 12y agoSo, I should only help the bottom 1% and not help the bottom 2% - 5%?