Government To Require Websites Be Handicap Accessible?

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The government is looking to expand the Americans with Disabilities Act to require certain websites to be accessible to those with disabilities.

Emergency call centers could be equipped to communicate by text message. Websites might need to be programmed to speak to blind users. Movie theaters might have to install technology to allow the deaf to read captions on small screens mounted at their seats.
 
Just what we need to prop up an ailing economy. Busy-body work requriing a visual centric medium like the web to have mandatory access to blind people.
 
The ADA is such shit. It does good but is a crock of crap at the same time. Look at all the small mom & pop shops that have to spend 10s of thousands just to meet the bathroom ADA rules.
 
Those who wish to use the internet in this fashoin can pay website developers to help their cause, or find a charity that will. Let's not have the government regulate the internet into oblivion.
 
I'm not quite sure how blind people even use a pc, there is narrator on windows but even then trying to find what you want with that is pretty hard. Let alone the internet. I wonder if they will make vocal ads lol :p
 
I'm not quite sure how blind people even use a pc, there is narrator on windows but even then trying to find what you want with that is pretty hard. Let alone the internet. I wonder if they will make vocal ads lol :p

yes, lets make ads specific to blind users. :D
 
I love how the government steps in on this but damned if they (1) offer any money to make it happen (2) offer any way to even make it possible.

I mean really. How does one code a website so the blind can use it? :confused:
 
I think that making making web pages for the visually impaired might fix all that is wrong with the internet.

Think about the worst page you have ever visited, now think about trying to describe that page in detail with words. It can't be done. So basically this law would have killed geocities and Myspace before then even got off the ground! Also, do you think anyone could have gotten away with pop ups if they had to describe them as "the page you were trying to read is block with an add for penis growth" No way that would have made it past the handicap police.
 
I believe in the ADA, but this is taking things too far.
 
I own a web design / development company and let me be the first to tell you, this is bad for both everyone AND web designers...
 
ADA is sometimes good though. Without ADA, laws governing closed captioning and subtitles would be non-existent and sporadic. I've been waiting forever for them to require network to include captioning and subtitles to streamed videos. There's no reason why they're not included and Netflix can shove it when they said that the technology isn't here yet. Hulu begs to differ.

Fuck you, television network, for going this long without captioning your internet shows. Laws should not be needed to enforce what should otherwise be common decency.
 
I mean really. How does one code a website so the blind can use it? :confused:
Design for screen readers, which isn't actually all that difficult. Using title and alt attributes and writing straightforward, valid code is usually enough.
 
I think some of you guys are reading too much into this by the way. Some things that should already be enforced aren't, as in my example, network shows. Home made videos are of course exempted from this, and private web sites should be too.
 
Am I the only one who thinks this is an awesome thing? I have several eye diseases that will one day make me blind. I am a gamer, PC tech, movie fan, etc. Wtf am I going to do in x years when I'm blind? Stare blankly at the wall? Imagine yourself going deaf or blind for a moment then see if your opinion changes. I think its great that we can try to help people with disabilities feel a little more normal and improve quality of life. We have the technology to do it. Sure it costs money, but tech refreshes so quickly now anyway. Build the next thing with the possible new laws in mind from the get go.
 
I'm not quite sure how blind people even use a pc, there is narrator on windows but even then trying to find what you want with that is pretty hard. Let alone the internet. I wonder if they will make vocal ads lol :p

I had a blind man come in with his wife last year shopping for a new laptop. He turned on narrator and used hot keys for freaking everything. He was probably the fastest computer user I have ever seen. I was very impressed. Would hate to see him have to learn a new OS though.
 
Design for screen readers, which isn't actually all that difficult. Using title and alt attributes and writing straightforward, valid code is usually enough.

also this

require certain websites

Freakin A people. This isn't a bad thing. a lot of these "certain sites" are supposedly to be 508 compliant anyway.
 
ADA is sometimes good though. Without ADA, laws governing closed captioning and subtitles would be non-existent and sporadic.
While I can appreciate your ailment, U.S. law should not exist to guarantee you an enjoyable television-watching experience via closed captioning. Television is primarily an entertainment medium, and as an informational source, you have several other alternatives.

I will say, though, that companies who provide closed captioning services probably do provide a genuine economic benefit, so the law(s) may not actually be economically harmful (though that doesn't necessarily justify their existence on a matter of pure political principle).
 
Am I the only one who thinks this is an awesome thing? I have several eye diseases that will one day make me blind. I am a gamer, PC tech, movie fan, etc. Wtf am I going to do in x years when I'm blind? Stare blankly at the wall? Imagine yourself going deaf or blind for a moment then see if your opinion changes. I think its great that we can try to help people with disabilities feel a little more normal and improve quality of life. We have the technology to do it. Sure it costs money, but tech refreshes so quickly now anyway. Build the next thing with the possible new laws in mind from the get go.

I'm betting in 10 to 15 years, we will have technology that will allow blind people to see again. Maybe I'm wrong but I've seen some pretty impressive stuff.
 
yah, it costs money, but how much, who pays, and how many people benefit? I am all for helping people but I also believe in using money for the maximum benefit.

as an example, a bank website adding screen reader support to give greater access to their customer base = good. government regulations + enforcement requiring business to implement the same = bad.
 
While I can appreciate your ailment, U.S. law should not exist to guarantee you an enjoyable television-watching experience via closed captioning. Television is primarily an entertainment medium, and as an informational source, you have several other alternatives.

So someone who is blind/deaf is going to have to what? Pick up a newspaper or hopefully be logged in on a site when an evac or some other issue comes up? I can understand radio for blind, but for deaf? I don't see how having many forms of information being accessable to those with disabilities on a public airway is a bad thing.
 
While I can appreciate your ailment, U.S. law should not exist to guarantee you an enjoyable television-watching experience via closed captioning. Television is primarily an entertainment medium, and as an informational source, you have several other alternatives.

I will say, though, that companies who provide closed captioning services probably do provide a genuine economic benefit, so the law(s) may not actually be economically harmful (though that doesn't necessarily justify their existence on a matter of pure political principle).

It's easy for you to be non-empathetic about a handicap until you actually experience it. Television is more than just an entertainment medium. It's a communications medium as well. Same with the internet and other forms of communications. Anything can be construe as entertainment these days.
 
Things like making 911 textable and government emergency broadcasts available for everyone make sense. Forcing companies to make their websites handi-friendly seem much more like an overstepping of government power.

This is coming from a partially deaf person.
 
I just wish that they would hurry up and pass a law telling me when I can shit!! Starting to get really bloated, and its making me cranky.................
 
Television is more than just an entertainment medium. It's a communications medium as well. Same with the internet and other forms of communications.
But you feel the federal government should legislate your ability to access to these information sources in a way you are physically able to given your impairment despite that not being a right granted to you by the Constitution? I just don't understand where the entitlement stems from, exactly, because the Constitution itself does not entitle you to it.

Like I said, I take issue with this kind of movement on the basis of political principle, not in a fundamental way.
 
I for one welcome this law. This just means more money in my pocket charging the snot out of companies for bring their site into compliance.

That said, I am really against forced compliance like this. Honestly if a company is decent and wants the business of the disabled, then they should take it upon themselves to accommodate them. This in turn means the handicapped could quickly determine which businesses really value their business and support them in turn. While not supporting companies that don't care and are only doing what they are forced too.
 
I don't think this is something the government should regulate. Let the private sector work it out if there is enough interest.
 
I'm trying to figure out why this is news.
Text-only versions of a web page have been mandatory in a lot of circles for at least 10 years.
Is anyone surprised that the government has decided to expand that?
 
I think this is great.

This to yourself - what would you do if you were struck blind one day by an accident of some sort.

Would you just.. never visit [H] again? I know I would.

But yeah, I don't think we should expect companies to put millions into this, unless it was state-sponsored, which it should be.
 
But yeah, I don't think we should expect companies to put millions into this, unless it was state-sponsored, which it should be.

Forcing it with new tax laws sounds awful. If it means that much to people, start a charity.
 
I think this is great.

This to yourself - what would you do if you were struck blind one day by an accident of some sort.

Would you just.. never visit [H] again? I know I would.

But yeah, I don't think we should expect companies to put millions into this, unless it was state-sponsored, which it should be.

eh, if I get in a car accident and die and couldn't visit [H] I'd be pretty upset. I think it should be mandated that all websites are death-accessible also. Really though what are the limits here? How much involvement do you want the government to have in your daily life? It is becoming a little too much.
 
eh, if I get in a car accident and die and couldn't visit [H] I'd be pretty upset. I think it should be mandated that all websites are death-accessible also. Really though what are the limits here? How much involvement do you want the government to have in your daily life? It is becoming a little too much.

You kind of answered your own question.

The limit is death. Or possibly being blind AND deaf.

But as long as someone is either blind or death.. we should help them.

But not by heightening taxes - just by using them better.

Don't think the government uses taxes well? Get rich.
 
ADA is sometimes good though. Without ADA, laws governing closed captioning and subtitles would be non-existent and sporadic. I've been waiting forever for them to require network to include captioning and subtitles to streamed videos. There's no reason why they're not included and Netflix can shove it when they said that the technology isn't here yet. Hulu begs to differ.

Fuck you, television network, for going this long without captioning your internet shows. Laws should not be needed to enforce what should otherwise be common decency.

Closed Captioning. What a piece of crap. Guess the percentage of those using CC are actually physically impaired. It's like what? 10%?

Am I the only one who thinks this is an awesome thing? I have several eye diseases that will one day make me blind. I am a gamer, PC tech, movie fan, etc. Wtf am I going to do in x years when I'm blind? Stare blankly at the wall? Imagine yourself going deaf or blind for a moment then see if your opinion changes. I think its great that we can try to help people with disabilities feel a little more normal and improve quality of life. We have the technology to do it. Sure it costs money, but tech refreshes so quickly now anyway. Build the next thing with the possible new laws in mind from the get go.


I have no problem with this. Let's increase taxes on those with the disabilities or give them less tax exemptions. Why is the bill always handed off to everyone else?

So someone who is blind/deaf is going to have to what? Pick up a newspaper or hopefully be logged in on a site when an evac or some other issue comes up? I can understand radio for blind, but for deaf? I don't see how having many forms of information being accessable to those with disabilities on a public airway is a bad thing.

TV, newspaper, website, phone, radios, etc. Guess what? None of them are ever needed for receiving an evac order. The police, firefighters, national guard, etc will be at your door.
 
Closed Captioning. What a piece of crap. Guess the percentage of those using CC are actually physically impaired. It's like what? 10%?

And your point is? Oh, you can pull numbers out of your ass? Got it.

Forum's full of internet tough guys, I swear.
 
Who's going to decide which web pages are required to be accessible and what is required to comply with the regulations? More importantly: how do we ensure that these regulations don't hold back advances in browser technology? After all, what good is the next Flash Killer going to be if nobody can use it until decades into future when the law gets updated (and long after said Flash Killer is dead)?

A mandate on entry ramps and closed captions seems simple by comparison.
 
Wow, I wonder which lobbyist came up with this blank check idea. They should feed him to a lion, and then stop listening to stupid suggestions.
 
Back
Top