Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    162 points Aissen | 24 comments | | HN request time: 1.422s | source | bottom
    1. chriskanan ◴[] No.42130234[source]
    I don't understand why in the current era we don't have videos just post-processed by the media player / TV. That seems like it would increase accessibility while not irritating folks who do not have epilepsy.

    I tried to search to see if something like a plugin existed for VLC, and I didn't find anything. Seems like it should be solvable at least if the media can be parsed ahead of time or with some delay for a live feed.

    replies(6): >>42130402 #>>42130482 #>>42130491 #>>42130656 #>>42131097 #>>42131235 #
    2. MBCook ◴[] No.42130402[source]
    I’ve wondered about that too.

    My immediate suspicion is liability fear. If you add that feature, even if it helps a tons of people, someone will sure you when it doesn’t help them/their family member.

    replies(1): >>42131036 #
    3. xahrepap ◴[] No.42130482[source]
    Similarly, I would love if videos/blurays/streams/etc had a way to adjust volumes separate from each other. So many movies have such loud music and quiet dialog. So I'm constantly adjusting the volume between different scenes.
    4. wizzwizz4 ◴[] No.42130491[source]
    The software to do this doesn't exist. We have some software to assess the "epilepsy-safety" of a given piece of media, but it's proprietary and afaik not realtime.

    There was a bounty to make an open-source replacement, but I've lost my link. I've still got the WCAG info sheet, though: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/three-flashes-or... if anyone wants to have a go. (I'd suggest making a standalone application, plus something that works with GStreamer.)

    replies(1): >>42131834 #
    5. dalbin ◴[] No.42130656[source]
    There is a feature called "Dim Flashing Lights" available on iOS, and the algorithm with multiple implementations is on Github : https://github.com/apple/VideoFlashingReduction
    replies(1): >>42134107 #
    6. zeta0134 ◴[] No.42131036[source]
    I'd just market it as a comfort feature rather than a safety one. I don't have epilepsy but I also don't particularly like strobing flashing screen effects, especially in older games. Having an option to turn them off increases my enjoyment, even if it doesn't really affect my safety.
    7. devnullbrain ◴[] No.42131097[source]
    That pushes the onus onto the disabled person to avoid places and rooms with TVs that haven't had the setting enabled, repeatedly asking the same questions and revealing their health history to feel safe in public.
    replies(3): >>42131439 #>>42132770 #>>42132940 #
    8. munificent ◴[] No.42131235[source]
    > while not irritating folks who do not have epilepsy.

    From the article:

    "However, photosensitivity is not just connected to seizures! Photosensitivity also affects those who are visually impaired, and those who have migraines, amongst other conditions."

    ...

    "And these non-epileptic seizures are exactly what occurred during “Electric Soldier Porygon.” 76% of those who had seizures during the event had never experienced a seizure before, and of those who had, most had never had a seizure provoked by TV before."

    9. alternatetwo ◴[] No.42131439[source]
    But do you honestly expect humanity to only create content for this miniscule populace? That sounds horribly limiting.
    replies(4): >>42131476 #>>42131738 #>>42131961 #>>42132892 #
    10. hunter2_ ◴[] No.42131476{3}[source]
    There is a place for unbounded creativity, and I think I'd argue in favor of it, but I can't imagine an easier argument against it: We try to only create websites with sufficiently high contrast for interactive elements, only create public buildings with ADA features, etc. -- even if aesthetics suffer as a result. It's just aesthetics.

    To be clear, I'm discussing only that which the public is invited to enjoy. No rules when it's just for you and yours.

    replies(2): >>42132556 #>>42132811 #
    11. spondylosaurus ◴[] No.42131738{3}[source]
    TFA notes that it's not just a "miniscule populace". Electric Porygon affected 10% of the people who watched it, most of whom were not epileptic.

    > According to the World Health Organisation, about 10% of people will have a seizure in their lifetime. And these non-epileptic seizures are exactly what occurred during “Electric Soldier Porygon.” 76% of those who had seizures during the event had never experienced a seizure before, and of those who had, most had never had a seizure provoked by TV before. This event is actually what helped confirm that people without any history of epilepsy can have seizures triggered by flashing lights. It is estimated that of the 7 million viewers, 10% had some sort of physical medical reaction but not all of these needed specific medical attention.

    replies(3): >>42131824 #>>42131837 #>>42131840 #
    12. SauntSolaire ◴[] No.42131824{4}[source]
    I'd be very interested to see how they came up with that estimation.
    13. NavinF ◴[] No.42131834[source]
    That is incorrect. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42130656
    14. teractiveodular ◴[] No.42131837{4}[source]
    I'd like to see a source for that estimate, because "10% had some sort of physical medical reaction" is quite vague and seems improbably high.

    Wikipedia states the episode was viewed by 4.6 million households, of whom 685 (0.001%) were taken to hospital. While 12,000 children reported mild symptoms (0.2%), studies suggest many of these were psychosomatic and triggered more by parents freaking out over exposure (this was huge news in Japan) than the exposure itself.

    15. Aloisius ◴[] No.42131840{4}[source]
    I thought it was accepted that mass hysteria after reports of the first children were sent to the hospital was most likely to blame for the overwhelming majority of reports of negative reactions.
    16. devnullbrain ◴[] No.42131961{3}[source]
    Humanity does.
    17. hiatus ◴[] No.42132556{4}[source]
    Isn't art the place for unbounded creativity?
    replies(1): >>42132723 #
    18. hunter2_ ◴[] No.42132723{5}[source]
    Yes. But when you invite the public to subject themselves to art incompatible with schizophrenia, then is it that much different from inviting the public to a website incompatible with visual impairments or to a brand new store incompatible with wheelchairs? Again I do lean on the side of art in this case, but I also find the argument against it to be pretty solid.
    replies(1): >>42136183 #
    19. small_scombrus ◴[] No.42132770[source]
    It does somewhat, but its also weird that its not a feature that companies add to things to expand their potential sales base & give people a reason to buy their stuff.

    Obviously it should be on all of us to try and minimise the number of seizures we're causing, but it's also on us (as humanity) to make it possible for people to actively avoid or mitigate things that cause seizures.

    Someone else on this thread mentioned that Apple have an accessibility feature specifically for this[1][2] which is kind of ideal.

    1 - the comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42129236#42130043

    2 - You can find it under motion settings here: https://www.apple.com/au/accessibility/vision

    20. notpushkin ◴[] No.42132811{4}[source]
    Counterpoint: while high contrast requirements can make the designer rethink the aesthetics approach, it also makes text easier to read for everybody. Of course, website authors can get lazy and just crank up the contrast without considering whether it looks good, but that’s just bad design.

    On the other hand, the techniques we see applied to anime releases are just that: quick low effort fixes. Of course, this doesn’t mean the show producers are lazy or incompetent: fixing those issues properly would take extreme effort as at least a lot of re-coloring. Still, the result is that now everybody has subpar experience.

    I’d say just release both versions and let people decide.

    21. harimau777 ◴[] No.42132892{3}[source]
    I could understand if this was something major, but avoiding excessively flashing lights doesn't seem all that limiting to me.
    22. handoflixue ◴[] No.42132940[source]
    You could just make a requirement that TVs in public places have that feature enabled. If you're watching TV with friends, you're probably already disclosing that information today.
    23. koshergweilo ◴[] No.42134107[source]
    That's actually pretty cool, props to Apple for open sourcing it
    24. ◴[] No.42136183{6}[source]