Thanks to the Israeli accessibility law, I have to delete my websites

somebody has a handicap, they are not underserved, that's a political euphemism, they underappreciate the standard servings.

I'm all for helping people, but it needs to be in light of a cost-benefit calculation, including who pays the cost and who-all receives benefits, public and private goods (closed captions do benefit more than the deaf)... I guess I'm saying, this needs to be done in the light of day and judiciously, with more balance than just private aggrievement. If this guy in Israel or Berkeley is sharing material that we-the-people benefit from and think needs to be accessible, this "wound" should be allowed to fester a bit while a reasonable cure is found, rather than shutting the whole things down.

Reminds me of a thought I often have when old laws apply to novel new situations and harsh judgements are passed down, I wish the judge could rule "hey, nobody thought of this before, so we're going to let this one go, but we're gonna rule the opposite way in the future so correct the law, and/or get your act together".

"Can't this guy doing something for free do even more work, under threat of prosecution, for the putative but questionable benefit of a small minority?"

In general, being accessible is expensive, time consuming and requires care and forethought. Back in the days when businesses did get to decide whether or not they cared about the disabled (pre ADA in the us, for example) they largely decided they did not. This created a class of people shut out of the world. This is a bad outcome.

Accessibility laws need to be well crafted (which the israeli one may not be) and carefully balanced, but many societies decided to reduce the absolute freedom of choice for business owners in order to prevent a poverty stricken and secluded underclass of disabled people. I think that was a wise choice.

Less than 30 minutes later I was splayed out on the ground with my lower right leg broken clean in half and my tibia sticking out of my shin while an onlookers called me an ambulance. For 2 months afterwards I was confined to wheelchairs and walkers, and I only just recently was able to start walking independently again.

-

People make comments like this because they think it's a disabled market with disabled people, and another market beside... it doesn't work like that.

No matter how young you are, how careful you are, how healthy you are, we are all one bad morning away from being disabled for an indeterminate amount of time. And we all benefit from accessibility because at any time we might need to rely on it.

There's this mentality of seeing accessibility as an overpriced nice to have that's akin to seeing insurance as an overpriced nice to have just because you haven't made a claim yet

We need laws like what the ADA affords to back accessibility because (for the vast majority of businesses) it will never be profitable to cater to the disabled at a high level of quality.

I mean look at the OP. They pivoted to being a paid product yet still they're saying that they want to skirt the law by limiting the class size instead of paying some transcribers to add subtitles that would honestly benefit everyone (especially for technical content)

The disabled deserve to be catered to regardless of profitability because the inverse is unjust: that they'd live with greatly reduced access to goods and services based on something completely out of their control