On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> >> It is unethical for us to make and use technologies that are >> intentionally >> >> inaccessible, whether that be preventing deaf users from knowing what >> is >> >> being said in a movie production of Hamlet, or preventing English >> >> professors from critiquing parts of that same movie. >> > >> > Baloney. >> >> Which part is baloney? The part where deaf people get to enjoy >> Hamlet, or the part where English professors get to critique it? > > > the part where DRM/content protection is equated with intentionally > denying access to impaired users > the argument ian is making is akin to saying that use of https is intentionally denying access to hackers
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 22:14:14 UTC