I never stated that its never reasonable or good to force corporations to behave against their interests. What you stated is that the "mechanism" might be to treat a person's chosen software stack as a protected class. I can't agree with this, in any sense, and I think you're just trying to distract the conversation by suggesting it.
In a sense, that is the solution: ensure availability through open standards (like the web platform) through legislation.
My bank has stopped issuing physical TOTP tokens years ago, and I am holding on to one from 2006: when that one dies, I won't be able to use their e-banking web site if I do not have an Android or iOS locked-down phone.
Not, that does not mean making it a protected class. But instead, guaranteeing access through open protocols and open platforms should be sufficient.
I also hope legislation, like CRA/NIS2 in EU and different e-waste regulations combined, will push manufacturers to consider FOSS approach as a get-out-of-jail card too.
Re:Free software hasn't won
by array_key_first on Monday October 13, 2025 @09:16AM
(#45567989)
Accessibility requirements are completely unrelated to protected classes.
Similar to all the accessibility requirements, of course. Do you think the society / government should force banks to provide services to blind or deaf people? Or should we just let the market decide?