It would be great for accessibility if the pixellation was the result of a font, rather than actually using images to represent the text.
It would be great for the persistence of knowledge if they'd engrave the knowledge into titanium slabs that are buried in a protected cave as well. Correct me if I am wrong though, I believe, usually, that presentations are meant to be shown on a stage of some sort. I don't see how accessibility comes into play here. What I often see is that presentations at conferences/meetups, etc are not shared at all. Rather than…
> The irony being that if he'd have opted to not share at all, there wouldn't have been a user experience problem to begin with.
This isn't what GP asserted, this is a hyperbole.
GP is just making a suggestion to improve the software. You can take the suggestion for granted, comment on it, ignore it, you can up- and downvote it even. Just like you can do on GitHub or one of its competitors. You could even take it into account during a major overhaul.
If you can't even give honest feedback [1] on creative works we end up in a world of self-censorship. Compare it to how you're not allowed to give a negative reference in Germany. The difference then becomes in how positive people are raving about the employee. Pretty soon, you get a fake society where you supposedly fake it until you make it. I'd rather have brutal sincerity. Its more realistic and easier to process therefore more efficient.
Please, if my code sucks, tell me so, and tell me where you think I could improve. Heck, send me a patch or clone my git repo. I thrive on criticism as long as its constructive instead of destructive. The comment of GP is constructive.
[1] In this case a suggestion for improvement.