
Pornhub sued by deaf man over adult video site's alleged lack of subtitles - koolba
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/deaf-man-sues-popular-adult-site-lack-subtitles-videos-report
======
jolmg
This reminds me of a university (I can't remember which) that supposedly
posted free videos of lectures on their website. The content was said to be
absolutely awesome. Then they got sued for not having subtitles and the
university decided to just take the videos down. It was a loss to all.

~~~
rckoepke
I believe that was s/Stanford/Berkeley. Automated text to speech is so cheap
now though. Lectures could be uploaded to YouTube and Google would do it for
them.

~~~
jolmg
I still believe they shouldn't be obligated. It's stuff they're giving away
for free. It's like giving a beggar a sandwich and then having to compensate
the beggar for having included cheese in the sandwich I gifted them when
they're lactose-intolerant. I'd just not give away sandwiches in the future,
then.

~~~
HarryHirsch
The analogy fails. Consider instead a charity kitchen in a town with a fairly
substantial Jewish or Muslim community, but the charity kitchen insists on
serving pork.

Here are some statistics about hearing loss:
[https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/quick-
statistics...](https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/quick-statistics-
hearing)

They are enlightening. 25 % of people between 65 and 75 are hearing-impaired,
rising to 50 % of people over 75. What exactly is the argument for excluding
the aged from Berkeley's online offerings? It would be wiser to argue in
favour of accommodation for disabilities because it may be that you will need
them sometime in the future.

~~~
ta999999171
> Consider instead a charity kitchen in a town with a fairly substantial
> Jewish or Muslim community, but the charity kitchen insists on serving pork.

...less sympathetic than GP's example, religion is a choice.

~~~
HarryHirsch
_religion is a choice_

That's true for both sides. Why someone would do charity but leave a well-
defined group out of it is a mystery.

~~~
jolmg
How about, instead of a charity kitchen, it's a restaurant that gives away its
leftovers? If they only have pork leftovers, should they not give those away
to those in need? By disallowing them, their choice would either be to throw
the food in the trash or obtain other food to give away in addition to the
pork. Of course, most businesses would just shrug and throw it away.

------
mrguyorama
Interestingly enough, for the blind folks looking for adult entertainment
Pornhub offers "described videos".

~~~
intopieces
There's an interesting computer vision problem. Can we teach computers to
narrate porn?

~~~
anticensor
Narrated porn would not engage as much as regular porn ;(

------
bhouston
There is excellent* speech to text now. YouTube uses it for auto cc. I guess
it could be used in this case as well.

~~~
mrits
I imagine it could really be optimized as it would only need to pull from a
dictionary with 100 words or so

------
digitalsushi
The headline is bursting at the seams with the promise of low effort jokes.
Let us throw those tiny fish back into the pond.

A human being should be entitled to accessibility, especially by this point in
time where much of it can be machine generated.

~~~
developerdylan
But entitled to damages? We are opening the doors to some very shady law firms
to shake down tech companies based on laws that were written before the
internet.

~~~
spaceribs
Accessibility is not an entitlement, it's a right.

~~~
rckoepke
I believe you're mostly correct in terms of current legal situation in the
USA.

Downvotes are primarily going to be from people who would prefer that wasn't
the case.

However, I believe most accessibility improvements must be "reasonable"
accomodations and generally I think aren't intended to be onerous costs
(unreasonable).

So there's room for debate on whether accessibility should NO LONGER be a
right in the USA. And also room for debate on what's reasonable.

But I don't think this statement: "accessibility is a right" should be
downvoted on HN. Its a fact of law, due to the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

~~~
jolmg
> I don't think this statement: "accessibility is a right" should be downvoted
> on HN. Its a fact of law

This is a global community, though. Many probably interpret the statement from
a moral/idealistic standpoint rather than whether or not it's a legal right in
any particular jurisdiction.

~~~
OJFord
The situation's essentially the same in the UK (EU?) due to it being a
protected characteristic under the Equality Act.

You can't say 'well disabled people aren't the target demographic, so no I
don't have a ramp' any more than you can say 'whites only'.

The other commenter didn't claim it was a _moral_ (as opposed to statutory)
right, but even if that was the intention, I think that's a reasonable
position to take and argue for, even if others disagree.

------
rjkennedy98
I'm sure this guy also reads playboy for the articles.

------
Tagbert
Someone watches those videos with the sound on?

