Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

Публикация

I’ve seen some discourse about this ban negatively impacting d/Deaf/HH people who use smart glasses for captioning. I implore folks who make that point to more strongly reject disability dongles and demand meaningful accessibility in court settings. CART, signed & other language interpreters, etc.

Hypervisible

“Beginning on July 20, all eyewear or headwear that contains cameras, microphones or other recording technology will not be allowed inside any Unified Court System facilities, according to a memo from the Office of Court Administration.”

Обсуждение

2 прямых ответов · 3 сообщений

bsky.app/profile/ashl...

Ashlee 🤟🏻

For example: There is no path for me, a deaf person, to easily inquire about accessibility when I’m called for jury duty in Indiana. My only option is to say “Yes” to the infuriating question, “Do you suffer from a physical or mental disability that would prevent satisfactory jury service?”

and if they'd be a useful accessibility option, courts could then provide them, too. verified, trustworthy ones. there would still be no need/use for private owned ones to bring inside.

Ответ для davepermen

Yes potentially! Based on my experiences at movie theaters, I could see providing smart glasses as having a much higher administrative burden than scheduling CART or interpreters. Then there’s the issue of whether or not a person could wear them (eg I have glasses). But tech is *shiny*.