undefined | Better HN

0 pointsesyir6y ago0 comments

This feels very much like a "tyranny of the minority" type situation though, where you have to bend backwards to aid a small subset of the population at the cost of a larger chunk of the same. There's probably a balance somewhere to be found. Not everything should have to be ported across.

0 comments

snek6y ago

In 2010 Google determined that there were more people using the internet with accessibility features than Canadians. I can't find any new data, but I find it hard to assume that has gone down since. On top of that, making your website friendly to navigate with a keyboard doesn't just help people using accessibility features, lots of people use the keyboard to quickly navigate.

esyirOP6y ago

We have ~4.77 billion people on the internet. Assuming all of Canada was blind, that's 0.77% of total users. Under most circumstances, < 1% is a small minority.

I get that some level of accessibility is reasonable, but if you're expecting the same level of UI investment there for <1% of the population, I'd call that insane. Here, he can still call in and order the pizza.

SolaceQuantum6y ago

TBH personally I find this comment exceptionally strange given the rigors of acceptable limits among software uptimes and reliability outside of accessibility concerns. Netflix would probably not tolerate an entire country's access being revoked from their service for a technical reason they could fix. If AWS had a 0.77% downtime rate for all of their services, it would be a lot of services and a ton of bad press from businesspeople that are losing money due to AWS being down. If the Bloomberg terminal went down 0.77% of the time, it'd probably be considered completely unacceptable as a service to its userbase.

0.77% is something that would be protested ordinarily, except when it comes to accessibility concerns. Why?

1 more reply

snek6y ago

Making a website accessable isn't hard. there's a plethora of tooling available to help and most of it comes down to aria roles and color selection. It really is a bare minimum sort of task imo.

1 more reply

oblio6y ago

Are you actually making an "tyranny of the minority" argument against disabled people? :O

This is one of those basic human rights things. Especially if the service your site is offering is important or one of a kind. And especially as more and more things become accessible only through the internet.

esyirOP6y ago

Sure. They can order a pizza. Notice that I mentioned that reasonable allowances for disabled people can make sense, but I see no reason that a tiny minority should dictate the design viewed by a vast majority.

ltbarcly36y ago

I think this is a symptom of providing a legal remedy of 'you can sue'. There are dishonest lawyers with no interest in helping people with disabilities and they will sue you if they think you have enough money to make it worthwhile.

This is also the reason many of us have to step over used needles on the way to work every day, there are people who are going to die very soon from using heroin on the sidewalk, and there are lawyers lining up to sue if anything at all is done to discourage them from shooting up and passing out on the sidewalk.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

snek6y ago

esyirOP6y ago

We have ~4.77 billion people on the internet. Assuming all of Canada was blind, that's 0.77% of total users. Under most circumstances, < 1% is a small minority.

SolaceQuantum6y ago

0.77% is something that would be protested ordinarily, except when it comes to accessibility concerns. Why?

1 more reply

snek6y ago

Making a website accessable isn't hard. there's a plethora of tooling available to help and most of it comes down to aria roles and color selection. It really is a bare minimum sort of task imo.

1 more reply

oblio6y ago

Are you actually making an "tyranny of the minority" argument against disabled people? :O

esyirOP6y ago

ltbarcly36y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse