LBRY fixes the mess which libtards created

MickZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
7,576
According to Inside Higher Education, The University of Berkeley was forced to delete 20,000 online educational videos and podcasts due to violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Employees from Gallaudet University, a Washington D.C. school for the deaf, had filed a complaint with the Justice Department about Berkeley’s vast library of content being unavailable for consumption by those with hearing disabilities. The Justice Department investigated, and found that the content was indeed violating the law, and ordered that the university make the material more friendly for the deaf.
:wtf:
 

Ockie

Resident Lead Bender
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
51,332
Jesus. That is so retarded. So, if I cant watch it, THEN NO ONE WILL!!!! Idiots
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
43,769
If you read the University's own comments on this, it was also because the library was rarely used and they wanted to implement an authentication security level to protect the IP. Also it's a public entity meaning it's subject to the ADA.

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/03/01/course-capture/

And "libtards"? Really, MyBB? Not even trying to be taken seriously.
 

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
10,030
How does MyBB actually intend to be taken seriously with a headline like that. Is your staff writer 12 years old?
 

zAAm

Active Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
50
How does MyBB actually intend to be taken seriously with a headline like that. Is your staff writer 12 years old?
Yeah, I have to agree... At least try to be professional in your reporting.
 

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
10,030
According to Inside Higher Education, The University of Berkeley was forced to delete 20,000 online educational videos and podcasts due to violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In 1986, the National Council on Disability had recommended enactment of an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and drafted the first version of the bill which was introduced in the House and Senate in 1988. The final version of the bill was signed into law on July 26, 1990, by President George H. W. Bush. It was later amended in 2008 and signed by President George W. Bush with changes effective as of January 1, 2009.[3]
Damn those Bush libtards :mad:
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
25,822
If you read the University's own comments on this, it was also because the library was rarely used and they wanted to implement an authentication security level to protect the IP. Also it's a public entity meaning it's subject to the ADA.

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/03/01/course-capture/

And "libtards"? Really, MyBB? Not even trying to be taken seriously.
Nope
The vast majority of the lectures are licensed under a Creative Commons license that allows attributed, non-commercial redistribution. The price for this content has been set to free and all LBRY metadata attributes it to UC Berkeley.
 
Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
8,570
That headline is not even remotely acceptable...

Seriously? Wtf? I can only assume someone started their long weekend early and was trying to be funny
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
41,039
It's a pity nobody can fix the mess that is Kevin Lancaster's journalism career.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
25,822
This move will also partially address recent findings by the Department of Justice which suggests that the YouTube and iTunesU content meet higher accessibility standards as a condition of remaining publicly available.
I am sure all the people in the third world greatly appreciate this wise and noble gesture.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
25,822
It's a pity nobody can fix the mess that is Kevin Lancaster's journalism career.
That headline is not even remotely acceptable...

Seriously? Wtf? I can only assume someone started their long weekend early and was trying to be funny
How does MyBB actually intend to be taken seriously with a headline like that. Is your staff writer 12 years old?
If you read the University's own comments on this, it was also because the library was rarely used and they wanted to implement an authentication security level to protect the IP. Also it's a public entity meaning it's subject to the ADA.

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/03/01/course-capture/

And "libtards"? Really, MyBB? Not even trying to be taken seriously.
[video=youtube_share;DYZvB6TM7dw]https://youtu.be/DYZvB6TM7dw[/video]
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
25,303
If you read the University's own comments on this, it was also because the library was rarely used and they wanted to implement an authentication security level to protect the IP. Also it's a public entity meaning it's subject to the ADA.

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/03/01/course-capture/

And "libtards"? Really, MyBB? Not even trying to be taken seriously.
So they couldn't spare two hard drives? Also how do you protect the IP of copy left material? :confused:

The real issue here seems to be that universities are government institutions so unfortunately in this case they have to abide by the constitution and its rulings. But really, why complain over something someone else can use just because you can't use it? It may just be that I'm biased in this case but I think the headline is not only apt but called for.
 

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
10,030
So they couldn't spare two hard drives? Also how do you protect the IP of copy left material? :confused:

The real issue here seems to be that universities are government institutions so unfortunately in this case they have to abide by the constitution and its rulings. But really, why complain over something someone else can use just because you can't use it? It may just be that I'm biased in this case but I think the headline is not only apt but called for.
That's the point of the Americans with Disabilities Act though, to ensure that people with disabilities are accommodated by institutions. What's the point of enacting a law if it's just going to be ignored when things aren't so easy? It's easy for people like you, who have no disability, to just dismiss things like this but it makes a huge difference to people who have to live without the ability to hear, or whatever. And please explain to me how George HW Bush and George W Bush are considered 'libtards' since they enacted the laws that were responsible for the court decision. Or is it the deaf people who were seeking access to the education provided to you for nothing that are the 'libtards'?
 

Nick333

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
34,910
That's the point of the Americans with Disabilities Act though, to ensure that people with disabilities are accommodated by institutions. What's the point of enacting a law if it's just going to be ignored when things aren't so easy? It's easy for people like you, who have no disability, to just dismiss things like this but it makes a huge difference to people who have to live without the ability to hear, or whatever. And please explain to me how George HW Bush and George W Bush are considered 'libtards' since they enacted the laws that were responsible for the court decision. Or is it the deaf people who were seeking access to the education provided to you for nothing that are the 'libtards'?
For one thing you need to brush up on how laws are made in the US. It's part of POTUSs job to sign off legislation passed by congress. It affords him the opportunity to exercise his power to veto. Just because a president chose not to veto a new law or set of laws does not make it his law or a law he agrees with.

As I said before the Dems had a house majority in 1986 and 2009 so your insistence that these laws had anything to do with the Bushes just justifies the "tard" in libtard.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
25,303
That's the point of the Americans with Disabilities Act though, to ensure that people with disabilities are accommodated by institutions. What's the point of enacting a law if it's just going to be ignored when things aren't so easy? It's easy for people like you, who have no disability, to just dismiss things like this but it makes a huge difference to people who have to live without the ability to hear, or whatever. And please explain to me how George HW Bush and George W Bush are considered 'libtards' since they enacted the laws that were responsible for the court decision. Or is it the deaf people who were seeking access to the education provided to you for nothing that are the 'libtards'?
Listen bud, I am not against people with disabilities. I have long before you were probably born promoted good practices. Things like frames for instance which the rest of the world is against are actually the perfect tool for the blind, but google and web standards committee don't want them because apparently they are hard to index and break web pages, unless you implement a few simple tweaks.

This however is a step backwards. Instead of making things accessible they are trying to remove knowledge and I'm glad somebody is doing something about it. Instead of going this dumb route they could rather have promoted access to information. There are already tools to convert speech into text. An Iphone can be used right out of the box by a blind person which is why the darn things are so popular. But rather than move us forward they are trying to take us all a step backwards. But that's the MO of you SJWs.
 
Top