All the time. If it’s a company I dislike and I see them advertising on Google, I know I’m costing them money. Google uses an auction house system for ads, so common words can have a lot of competition. You could be making that company pay a dollar or more for that click, and at the same time contribute to a headache for their marketers who are keeping a close eye on their cost per click and customer acquisition costs.

Yeah, google wins in this scenario too, but there’s not much I can do about that.

I appreciate you

For sure, I just get antsy when peer review doesn’t come from from external sources

Hm, 5 year old journal, with the editor board, funding and half of the authors all from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, but significant hospital contribution. I remain skeptical of the headline but hopeful of the science.

Yes, unfortunately i think you’ve missed a few things.

1. Anyone can be sued for anything, whether the suit is successful depends on validity and damages
2. It would be difficult to prove damages in this case, but you don’t need to sue anyone anyway
3. Only businesses and organisations serving the public are required to follow the ADA
4. The government, if it received enough
   valid complaints and received a negative reply from a place which needs to follow the ADA might consider bringing legal action or enforcing penalties
5. Common practise does not exclude the possibility that something discriminates against people, which is why these rules were written

I think that about covers it

Sadly, the ‘G’ in WCAG is ‘guidelines.’ It doesn’t have teeth; there is no legislation around WCAG.

Used to be true. More and more government agencies are referencing the WCAG as the standard, and The Revised 508 Standards which sets the rules for government bodies directly pins it to WCAG v2.0. WCAG compliance has also been specifically ruled in various Title 3 cases, which sets the precedent.

There is still lots of legal ambiguity around accessibility, but the ADA definitely looks at web accessibility and WCAG when something significant is brought to its attention

Ok! You have the right to do that.

But the US Department of Justice has the right to investigate and fine you up to $75k the first time, if it is determined that you are running a business or organisation in the US that provides public accommodations and you are discriminating against people who have disabilities and you could afford to fix it.

Lots of rights for everyone! It’s so nice.

Correct and nicely sourced!

deleted by creator

Scrolling chatmay have slightly different additional requirement around allowing control of update frequency

Sounds great for daily driving. But you’re still free to open another browser at any point to test!

No problem! I really appreciate you making any effort to include all of your audience.

Yes! Prefers-reduced-motion is nice but was not developed for this reason and it is not enough to be following the rule but this hasn’t specifically been tested in court yet.

It was made for people who get sick from things like parallax animations where big things move around, even with interaction. In the future that will have its own rule and prefers reduced motion will help pass that, but it does not help with this one.

Edit: to be clear, you could use it to help, but it’s not enough on its own

It starts before birth. Low socio-economic status affects the health of pregnant people, which in turn has consequences for foetal development. Stress is a big trigger for various latent congenital issues, and that’s one reason climate change is going to result in increased rates of disease.

Not just a defense witness, a former federal prosecutor. A judge had to tell a former federal prosecutor “And then if you don’t like my ruling, you don’t give me side eye and you don’t roll your eyes.” like he was a pouty teenager.

As has medicine and most other technologies. And yet… the question is never asked about the long term threats posed by people who aren’t personally hunting and tracking and foraging.

And miss out on the reminder that my existence is precarious and dependent on the good-will of the able-bodied? Nah, that’s head-in-sand stuff. I prefer to remind everyone of what this line of questioning has led to in the past and the human consequences of discussing the rights of a group of people in the abstract.

Exactly, and yet the question is never “is agriculture a long-term threat to humanity?”. It’s always the people with medical issues who are acceptable first choices as society’s sacrificial MacGuffin, long before we question any technology that benefits the person who is “just asking questions”.

It’s like we didn’t already do Social Darwinism the first time. Super frustrating.

Even if we ignored the entire history of the word cripple, it still would be remarkable to not consider hunchback or dwarf as physical descriptions. Given that your next question references video games and then we fall down Godwin’s slippery slope, I’m not convinced you’re honestly engaging with the concept of connotation.

the words only have deragatory meaning to those who have decided they are such.

Yes, and when the people who have to live with the consequences of discrimination tell you that you’re speaking in the same way as those who have discriminated against them, it’s worth considering. Even momentarily.

Have a great day, I’m going to go be a cripple elsewhere now. Nah, just kidding, it will still be my couch. Just not this thread.

If you wanted to emphasise the challenges he dealt with, adjectives for his physical appearance were not a good choice. The challenges he would have dealt with may have included chronic pain, limited mobility and discrimination. You could even have said he suffered from kyphosis. But words which have been frequently intended to be derogatory don’t do much to create a sense of empathy.

could be applied to anyone.

And it’s nice to see disability being normalised, even if that wasn’t your intent.