For everyone

At accessibility talks, I love to show a photo of Sir Tim Berners-Lee and the words he made appear on enormous screens during the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony in London: ‘This is for everyone’.

Display in stadium showing this is for everyone Copyright: Martin Rickett/PA Wire, from The Guardian

With ‘this’, he meant the web, I assume. I like to ponder what the other bit means, ‘for everyone’. It’s probably a number of different things:

  • Everyone can have a website. As in, you can register a domain, get hosting and put your site on. All at low cost and sometimes free. You do not need permission and are free to put whatever content on: your corporate mission statement or your love for the Vengaboys. Anything.
  • Everyone can go to websites, there’s no entry fee or barrier to the web —although there is to some sites and in some countries— the web is open to access by default.
  • Everyone can access the web, it is built to work for lots of different users, including those with visual, auditory or motor impairments, those with slow connections, those with new and those with old machines.

I think ‘this is for everyone’ refers for a large part to the universal accessibility of the platform. It is what makes the web awesome.

A different ‘for everyone’

During a meetup that took place at Uber Amsterdam’s offices this week, I learned about that company’s mission statement. Before I continue, it is very kind of them to host meetups, they are a great way for the web community to meet each other. I admire the hospitality that makes this possible.

Anyway, the statement:

Uber’s mission is to bring transportation — for everyone, everywhere.

I’m sorry, but it struck the wrong chord with me. Their everyone (and indeed their everywhere) means something else. Admittedly, this may come across as extreme cynicism, but let’s try and think about what it means for them. What Uber mean by making transport available to everyone, is that they want everyone’s transport transactions to run through their systems. So that they can get their financial cut.

This is, of course, a perfectly fine strategy and it is how economies work. It isn’t inherently wrong for companies to try and increase market share and profit, but it is definitely a different ‘for everyone’. It’s the same language with a different meaning. As the web-style ‘for everyone’ wouldn’t break sensible laws that protect vulnerable people, it wouldn’t monetise people in distress, it would not order fake rides to beat competitors, it would not deny users with guide dogs and it would not use its data to spy on ex-girlfriends, track one night stands and… well, the list goes on.

This is for themselves, not for everyone. Uber wouldn’t do those things if its for everyone was really about people and not about profits. They make Uber’s ‘for everyone’ sound hollow. And I don’t like that, because the web’s ‘for everyone’ is not hollow, it is built into how the platform technically works, in web standards, in all of that.


It appears ‘for everyone’ can have different meanings and I think it is important to see the difference between them, so that we are not fooled by for-profit companies that present themselves as charities. The web itself is a place where people are put first, and a place where power is not exercised on people, it is given to people.

Surely, it is great that so many companies are now using that platform for commercial purposes. Arguably that has helped with the platform’s popularity. It’s been pretty good for many of the world’ s economies too. But I can’t help but think about what the web could look like if we would make more things that really solve problems for everyone… let’s ask this: ‘what is the problem and who are we solving it for?’

Comments, likes & shares (27)

Anneke Sinnema wrote on 21 April 2018:
Ik was al benieuwd na die Uber-teaser laatst ;)
Hidde wrote on 21 April 2018:
Flurin Egger wrote on 21 April 2018:
I agree 100%! While inherently every companies goal is to make profit, it’s how you define your values that makes the whole difference
Peter van Grieken wrote on 21 April 2018:
We had an interesting chat about that. I believe being accessible gives organisations a competitive advantage, so now I’m not sure if I want Uber to have accessible products.
Large Heydon Collider wrote on 21 April 2018:
I like the Uber take. Never use that company.
Large Heydon Collider wrote on 21 April 2018:
Peter van Grieken wrote on 21 April 2018:
Eric Eggert wrote on 29 April 2018:
  • Swaziland king renames country Kingdom of eSwatini (The Guardian)Internationalization is hard, now you have to fit in a country with a lower case first letter.

    Meaning “place of the Swazi”, eSwatini is the Swazi language name for the tiny state landlocked between South Africa and Mozambique. Unlike some countries, Swaziland did not change its name when it gained independence in 1968 after being a British protectorate for more than 60 years.

  • Hand tremors and the giant-button-problem (Axess Lab)

    In accessibility, we usually argue for large tap areas – but they can be a problem for users with certain motor impairments.

    The user is trying to place his finger between the news stories. He’s hoping the space is unclickable, so that an accidental tap while trying to scroll will not activate a link. However, every part of the screen is linked. It’s like the whole interface is one giant button – hey what a clever comparison, let’s add that to the title of this article!

  • The BBC is letting you download more than 16,000 free sound effect samples from its archive (MusicRadar)

    There can be few organisations that have used more sound effects than the BBC, so there’s bound to be great interest in the news that the corporation has now made more than 16,000 of its FX available for free download.

    These are being released under the RemArc licence, which means that they can be used for “personal, educational or research purposes”.


    A useful site for people who need to communicate across time zones.

  • For everyone (Hidde de Vries)

    It appears ‘for everyone’ can have different meanings and I think it is important to see the difference between them, so that we are not fooled by for-profit companies that present themselves as charities. The web itself is a place where people are put first, and a place where power is not exercised on people, it is given to people.

  • Bits Up!: Cache-Control: immutableIn recent months, I have been surprised about the amount and possibilities of HTTP headers. Immutable is certainly one to add to the tool belt.

    When a client supporting immutable sees this attribute it should assume that the resource, if unexpired, is unchanged on the server and therefore should not send a conditional revalidation for it (e.g. If-None-Match or If-Modified-Since) to check for updates. Correcting possible corruption (e.g. shift reload in Firefox) never uses conditional revalidation and still makes sense to do with immutable objects if you’re concerned they are corrupted.

  • gridtoflex.comGood advice! (However, don’t use emojis in your CSS: It’s less understandable as you think it is, and there are likely weird edge cases in browsers.)

    CSS grid is AMAZING! However, if you need to support users of IE11 and below, or Edge 15 and below, grid won’t really work as you expect (more info here). This site is a solution for you so you can start to progressively enhance without fear!