[frittig]

Thank you for your insight. One thing that I've wondered for a while is, what do you do about captchas? The whole point of them is to prevent access to the webpage unless a person sees the graphic. Can you sue Google under ada?

[mltony]

Google's recaptcha is actually somehow really good - you just click on the checkbox and somehow it magically understands that you're a human, even when using a screenreader. Other websites have audio captcha. In the worst case, you can install a captcha-solving browser extension - they are typically 90% accurate.

[miki123211]

> Google's recaptcha is actually somehow really good - you just click on the checkbox and somehow it magically understands that you're a human,

Unless it doesn't. Yes, it gives you an audio captcha. No, it's not a good solution, as it's in english only, and a pretty good command of the language is required to solve it, especially now.

If you use TOR for some reason (nosy admin in my case). They always ask you to solve the challenge, but when you click audio, you get a spoken prompt saying "this computer is sending too many automated requests, so audio captchas have been blocked". I don't know who you'd need to sue, though. Either Google for not providing you the audio version, Cloudflare from preventing you access (and outsourcing the verification to Google), or the website itself for getting Cloudflare protection.

[gremlinsinc]

A. Whoever has the most $$, or B. (More likely), whoever is in charge of the element/component that is blocking accessibility. Since recaptcha is an embed that would be Google.

[toomuchtodo]

Newer recaptcha uses your google account as a heuristic if you’re logged in.

[michaelmrose]

A disabled person should not need to opt into a google account to be able to browse the web

[chopin]

Not only a disabled person...

[mehrdadn]

I think they have audio?