Hacker News Reader

Comment by elevation | Hacker News Reader

We need to extend the ADA to protect people who are not technologically-abled.

Or who don't want to sell their soul to Google or Apple.

Accessibility benefits everyone.

Other people covered under ADA who might agree: partially sighted/blind people (yes there's screen readers and such but a piece of paper is often simpler to handle), people with reduced mobility or tremors in their hands, and probably more.

My vision has gotten pretty bad the past couple years (not correctable with lenses)... I'm now using a 45" display and still have to zoom in a bit. I have my phone close to maxed out on text/display size options.. and only then it becomes unusable in most apps if I move the slider to the final position...

While I can use my phone for a lot of things, some UX with the larger text/display settings is absolutely unusable... so many modal dialogs where the buttons are off-screen and cannot be pressed, for example.

I can understand a small group/org not going through the effort in a lot of places... but for multi-billion dollar organizations, corporations and large govt entities, there's really no excuse.

This is a really good point. I'm surprised the box office cannot print it for him for a fee at Will Call, which might be the solution here.

No, it's not. If you are physically incapable of operating a piece of technology, the ADA covers reasonable accommodations for that. If you are simply unwilling to learn how to use a piece of technology, it doesn't and shouldn't cover that.

Being a luddite is not a protected class.

I agree with your assertion, but it made me think of a question.

Are Amish and Mennonites religiously protected luddites?

For sure, but I don't know how much of their luddite-ness (ludditude?) is simply a byproduct of their faith or vice versa :)

Most Amish under 30 have secret cell phones. It would only be the oldest generations without them. There are even lots of wink & nod arrangements where they may even have electricity in some outbuilding but they unplug it when elder comes to visit. It also depends on the Order as some are more strict than others. They generally aren't allowed to have electricity in "the house" but batteries and other workarounds exist.

They aren't as isolated these days as they used to be. If you go to Costco, you see them with 3 carts loaded 3 feet high of all the same crap everyone else is buying. A lot of times, they don't even transport it back via buggy but call the "Amish taxi service" which is people who drive them around town in large passenger vans. Even from a work source perspective, a lot have moved on from farm work and work in construction, roofing and other trades. If you go to a gas station in the morning, you'll see work trucks roll up and only Amish rollout to go buy soda and lunches or whatever.

[Source: I live in Lancaster and have for many years.]

Really interesting!

There are large populations of Amish who don't use cell phones, landline phones, or anything. The closest they'd get to a phone call is asking a neighbour to call 911 in an emergency (assuming they're even willing to do that).

One group I am aware of will only use a payphone in the nearest town. They actually filed to force AT&T to keep a payphone there because the relevant tariff required AT&T to do so, and were the only people who ever bothered to make AT&T do this. So there is one payphone in that town that they go to and drop their quarters in to make phone calls.

There are no "secret" cell phones there.

They don't really receive special accommodation for not using technology outside of being allowed to submit some required tax forms on paper instead of e-filing them, the logic being that the government requires them to do so under pain of punishment, so the government has to find a way to let them do it without violating their religious beliefs.

But there is not a general accommodation provided.

So, everyone needs to have $500 to be able to purchase a smartphone, otherwise they can’t participate in society?

There are 50$ smart phones that could do that …

There's more "cost" to an 81 y/o person picking up their first smartphone than just the money they'll be spending.

Well context is important and this was in directly response to the (spurious strawman) claim that if you can't spend $500 on a phone then you are excluded from society.

Yea I'd argue even less. You can get a used android phone w/ shipping for $15 on ebay. A new android phone for $30!

That's the price of one meal at a restaurant...

I was referring specifically to the idea that the Americans with Disabilities Act should cover people who simply choose not to utilize or learn a particular piece of technology which has been around for the better part of two decades.

The "poor people don't belong in society?!?" trope is completely different (and kind of boring).

lol not everyone wants/needs an iPhone

And yes. People need to get on with the times.

In the same way people "need" a power connection in their house. And water plumbing. And used to need a phone line to "participate in society"

So what's next?

Do they also need to have an age-verified Facebook account?

Plus an attested age-verified operating system on that phone?

Are they allowed to use GrapheneOS or do they need to use only the vendor's stock ROM image?

Is it OK if they turn off surveillance on the device or is that required too to "participate in society"?

I know you're joking but the future will be: No. Yes. No, stock only. No, surveillance required.

I don't think he's joking, some people are just like that

The problem with this argument is that forcing people to use technology, without proper training and against their will, introduces them to risks as well. Anyone with older parents/family can tell you the harms that come with phishing and other fraud scenarios that cost more than just accommodating people not using technology, both at the micro and macro level. Insulting people and bullying them into technology adoption when there are relatively simple fixes to the problem seem better than increasing risk exposure for no reason other than 'I believe that people who don't use technology are somehow lesser'.

Im going to be harsh, sorry.

In this case nobody is forcing them to buy a dodgers ticket. It’s a completely optional and absurdly expensive luxury good that is purely for leisure. They can simply not but a ticket if they don't want to accept conditions of sale.

Yeah... I mean, who says I should have to put in wheelchair ramps for my ballpark that seats tens of thousands? I mean, so few people use/need them, I should just be able to refuse service to those people. Right?

/sarc

I don't want to blow your mind but choosing not to have a smartphone and being in a wheelchair are not remotely comparable.

So, you want to force people to give money to specific, monopolistic, corporations? Why would I want a smart phone if I'm blind... how am I expected to use a smart phone when I am blind, exactly?

Because quality of life doesn't have a value in of itself. Especially for the elderly, they should be excluded from enjoying the end of their life simply because no wants to think of a solution to the problem that doesn't require them to introduce massive amounts of risk into their life which, also, negatively impacts their quality of life.

I love technology but having to give money to google and apple should not be a reason with stop people from doing things that CLEARLY don't need technology.

Also that is not what luddite means, like come on even in the bastardization of the term, he is not precisely smashing the ticketing machines, he is just an old guy don't be such a redditor with this senior.

If your ticket was in the form of a piece of music that you had to perform on your violin to gain entry, would you feel the same way? Keep in mind, it’s only in the last 15 years that playing the violin in this world became commonplace and only in the past 5 that these performances became required to access common goods and services. Violins also still cost hundreds or thousands of dollars.

Is your argument, "Give up your privacy or be left behind"?

Look at how conveniently you chose to ignore the fan's age, attributing his behaviour to unwilling or luddite! Or do you really have absolutely no idea, what it means to be 81 years old? Still, I would bet you have met at least some people of such an age.

That’s the age of my Microsoft office, three computer having multiple printer using mother…

Technology is often an issue for elderly people not because of disability or unwillingness, but because they lack the literacy, cognitive or motor skills necessary to operate technology that they are not familiar with. Many of them worked an entire career and retired before PC or cellphones were commonplace.

Maybe you are so familiar with computing that you take computing skills for granted.... but things like Solitaire were included in Windows explicitly to train people how to use a mouse. These skills are second nature to us but they aren't something we are born with.

The OP video actually addressed this: He went to the physical box office, and they seem to be able to print individual tickets. Just not a season ticket, for some reason.

This! I want to read HN but it's unfair that I have to do it on an electronic device. Ycombinator should be required to offer me a print service that delivers the top articles and a phone in service to make comments through

Good luck with that under the current administration.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com