[idiot_stick]

>The deaf are already at a measurable disadvantage. They're deaf. We should take steps to mitigate that.

Which is why we're not trying to cure their deafness. Instead, we're trying to ensure that the deaf have access to the same information those who aren't deaf have.

[darawk]

By taking information away from those who can hear.

[sbarre]

No, by passing laws that require institutions to provide their content in an accessible manner.

The law didn't force UCB to take the videos down, they chose to take them down rather than comply with the law.

Not the same thing..

[Sir_Substance]

>The law didn't force UCB to take the videos down

It totally did, it's an unreasonable cost, and thus a fake choice.

[darawk]

That doesn't change the fact that the outcome here is illogical. If you want to make things accessible, you need to penalize the institutions that don't make things accessible. Instead, we gave them the option to take it down. So the general public got penalized and UC Berkeley's incentives didn't change at all. Now they just won't make their lectures public.

[Myrmornis]

And indeed they already stopped making them public, in 2015. This latest thing is them being forced to remove public access to their historical collection.