As the review points out rather humorously, films targeted to children give dialogs on tariffs less screen time! Lucas' target audience was fanbois. From a financial perspective, he was successful. Money and feeding his ego are his only motivation. Lucas gives lip service to artistic vision, but he is not credible when making such claims.

Do you are understand that web accessibility is really not hard?

I mean, the web and computers are inherently 'visual' mediums.

Incorrect. The web is an information medium. As far as the computer goes, the display and keyboard are really kind of arbitrary, the compelling action takes place between those two!

I mean, I feel for the handicapped, and appreciate making things as accessible as possible, but, isn't it going a bit far on things that just are naturally aimed for normal people?

So, do you think it is a good practice for the Federal government to build (or pay for) things that create obstacles to citizens with disabilities? Or for the Feds to build/pay for applications that provide an obstacle to their current (and future) employees with disabilities?

I'm thinking geez... what a crock. NONE of the people needing training were handicapped... yet the rules still applied...

Some random observations:

1. Accomdations are still easier to provide in-person than remotely.
2. Odds are that with remote training, there would have been more participants, and likely some with disabilites.
3. The remote conferencing systems are way behind the ball on 508, and will never get their act together if they are not pressured by potential Federal customers to do so.

Why should it necessarily be that more efficient == less expensive, especially in the short term? Fossil fuels means taking advance of a resource that has taken literally millions of years to accumulate.

I think renewable implies efficient, at least enough for you to let the grandparent comment slide.

I'm convinced that you cannot have a good knowledge of the history of the textual transmission of the Bible and be a Protestant.

There are many liberal progressive protestants, whole demnominations really. I'm convinced that you cannot have a good knowledge of the history of the textual transmission of the Bible and be a fundamentalist.

I wish I could remember the name of this device, but it was essentially a MP3 player with no screen; just directional buttons and voice-based navigation. It was manufactured for blind users, and it worked wonderfully. It could even read text files and accept CF cards for expansion!

I have never heard of any MP3 player that works from voice commands, so I would like to hear more about that! Or do you mean synthesized speech based navigation? If so, you may have been thinking of RockBox. Which is FOSS that runs on a variety of hardware.

I think that a cell phone with just buttons on it and braille lettering would suffice, provided that the voice navigation is really good. An added advantage is that having no screen can make for very thin and attractive devices, if aesthetics is something of a priority for them.

I think this could also be a good opportunity to market to tech-phobic grandma types that want a cell phone that is only a phone. ("Why does a phone need a screen anyway?") The only cell phone I have encountered without a screen (Owasys 22C) was not as thin as I thought it could/should be. This was a couple of years ago though. Aesthetics can be more than visual. I know a couple of blind folks that were sold on Macs because they took the time to hold a Mini in their hands.