[blindlaw] UpDate on Linkedin website:

[Marc Workman]

The mistake here seems to be in thinking that a single solution has to be 
implemented.  There probably is no single solution that will allow every 
human being, and no computer, to varify that an actual person is entering 
the information.

Why not have several options? Why not have a visual option, an audio option, 
a logic option, a phone in option, and any other option that is necessary 
without constituting an undo hardship?

I realize that for some companies this would be burdensome, but for the 
larger companies, this is simply a matter of providing a reasonable 
accommodation.

We need to stop thinking in terms of a single solution.  It just isn't out 
there, but this doesn't mean a multi-pronged approach won't work.

Best,

Marc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "E.J. Zufelt" <lists at zufelt.ca>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] UpDate on Linkedin website:


>I have to agree here.  In canada we have the concept of reasonable 
>accommodation, providing a reasonable accommodation cannot be an undue 
>burden on the respondent in a human rights action.
>
> So, if a site were only making an audio, or only a visual, CAPTCHA 
> available, I would argue that they should make both available as a 
> reasonable accommodation.  This would likely not be an undue burden. 
> However, ensuring that their security mechanism works for * all * Internet 
> users, and still provides security, is impossible. Therefore, it would, in 
> my opinion, constitute an undue burden.
>
> HTH,
> Everett Zufelt
> http://zufelt.ca
>
> Follow me on Twitter
> http://twitter.com/ezufelt
>
> View my LinkedIn Profile
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ezufelt
>
>
>
> On 2010-09-11, at 5:14 PM, Jorge Paez wrote:
>
>> Peter:
>> You can't sue them.
>> Its a security mesure that fits the greater majority--from the standpoint 
>> of someone who studies law closely, you cannot sue them for such 
>> particular things. Not saying weather you're right or wrong, but it 
>> wouldn't be legally possible.
>>
>> Jorge
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Peter Donahue wrote:
>>
>>> Good afternoon everyone,
>>>
>>>   It has been pointed out that so far no one has issued a legal 
>>> challenge
>>> to the use of CAPTCHAS and the accessibility problems they cause. 
>>> Perhaps a
>>> good law suit is just what the doctor ordered to spur developers in to
>>> action to create new methods of spam and bot control that protects 
>>> Internet
>>> infrastructures while insuring accessibility for all. All I can say is 
>>> bring
>>> it on! I also wish to apologies to Scott, David and others for this
>>> off-topic thread. All the best for a great weekend.
>>>
>>> Peter Donahue
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc." 
>>> <ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com>
>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 3:51 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] UpDate on Linkedin website:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello Mr. Zufelt:
>>>
>>> Here in Denver, we have the U.S. Mint that prints virtually all the 
>>> coins
>>> used in the United States.
>>>
>>> In order to take a tour of the Mint, one has to schedule a date on the
>>> Mint's website.  The last few I have scheduled, a random number is 
>>> generated
>>> and I was asked to enter the number into an edit box.  I was able to 
>>> READ
>>> THE GENERATED NUMBER for myself without assistance from a third party, 
>>> and I
>>> DID NOT have to use any audio.
>>>
>>> This type of CAPTCHA is, in my view, far more accessible than the 
>>> GARBLED
>>> audio types I have had to deal with.  No, I am NOT HEARING IMPAIRED; but
>>> those GARBLED AUDIO thingies can be a ROYAL pain one million percent of 
>>> the
>>> time.  To be succinct, I detest them!
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Olusegun
>>> Denver, Colorado
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jorgeapaez%40mac.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> blindlaw:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lists%40zufelt.ca
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mworkman.lists%40gmail.com
>