News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind. Parent comment

Re:Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind by Iftheshoefits on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @09:00PM (#8300271)
> In my understanding, they are denying the presence of an animal in their car, not necessarily the disabled person.

Your understanding is incorrect, because denying the presence of the animal is identical to denying the dependent disabled person because he's disabled. The two are inextricably linked together.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind by totony on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @11:36PM (#8300742)
Imo there is a difference, as the motive for not allowing the person is different. Morality is majorly about motives.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind by ASneakyFox on Thursday September 11, 2014 @04:55AM (#8301546)
I agree there's a difference. As the objection is not to the person. But being that the person needs a dog to go anywhere in public the two are very intertwined.

Also itd serve as loophole to discriminate since many blind people have service dogs.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind by lazylizard on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @09:58PM (#8300464)
its a bit like saying hearing-impaired people can't take the ride if they bring their hearing aid along.
[ Parent | on HN ]