Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Hardware Hacking Input Devices Build Games

How One Man Helps Keep Game Controllers Accessible 130

capedgirardeau writes with a clipping from the AP about engineer Ken Yankelevitz: "[W]ith the retired Bozeman engineer's 70th birthday approaching, disabled gamers say they fear there will be no one to replace Yankelevitz, who has sustained quadriplegic game controllers for 30 years almost entirely by himself. The retired aerospace engineer hand makes the controllers with custom parts in his Montana workshop, offering them at a price just enough to cover parts." Yankelevitz builds interfaces to control an Xbox 360 or PlayStation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How One Man Helps Keep Game Controllers Accessible

Comments Filter:
  • by Samantha Wright ( 1324923 ) on Saturday June 11, 2011 @08:08PM (#36414494) Homepage Journal
    Yes, but due to the dynamics of capitalism, they don't.
  • by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Saturday June 11, 2011 @08:09PM (#36414498) Homepage Journal

    Really what a great and admirable hobby. This is a gentleman that must sleep well every night.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 11, 2011 @08:35PM (#36414678)

    This is a quality of life issue, asshat.

    Quads spend most of their time confined to a bed. A game controller build to meet their needs opens worlds of interactive entertainment to people who would otherwise be limited to passive consumption (television) or limited interaction via a visual keyboard.

    captcha: network

    And thats what these people gain: a greater network of human interaction. Shame on you for pissing on that.

  • by siride ( 974284 ) on Sunday June 12, 2011 @02:03AM (#36415890)

    Why do you assume that all disabled people are that way because they made some stupid decision? Oftentimes, it's because some other person, like a drunk driver, made a stupid decision, but these people have to pay for it. But there's otherwise nothing wrong with them and there's no reason why they should be removed from the gene pool or made to suffer even more than they already are.

    Also, you seriously misunderstand how evolution works. Removing a couple of obvious failures from the system doesn't necessarily produce a better gene pool. The genes for stupid behaviors are complex and varied, if they even exist at all, and many, if not most of us, are probably carriers. Furthermore, the stupid are themselves carriers for good genes. By only explicitly selecting the "good" and getting rid of all the undesirables, we not only fail to solve the problem, but we also destroy good genes as well as genetic diversity.

    Social Darwinism doesn't work. Never did, never will.

A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson