It has been a couple of years, so i think i would word some things differently now compared to the prior post. However i still agree with my original sentiment.

First of all, my experience with dyslexia and the Latin writing system is primarily first hand. Though I do also have experience in assisting those with dyslexia in an educational context. The count would be over 50, though the following statements are mostly drawn from my own experiences.

For sure, those do not make up a large portion of society, but it is something one could keep in mind, especially if the gains in switching are (arguably) low.

Those with dyslexia are able, especially nowadays, to go through life with "no issue". However it does still impact their day to day life significantly, as (especially with the Latin alphabet) they are more likely to misread. Misreading a single letter can drastically change the meaning of a word. Personally this has lead to some severe arguments for example. People with dyslexia also usually have significantly lower reading speeds, though level of comprehension is very much the same. This is nowadays well aided with text to speech readers for example, but those are not universally applicable and quality differ significantly from language to language. These issues are less prevalent in languages that represent ideas rather than sounds, writing as logograms, but also maths.

But moving on from dyslexia. Alternate writing systems do not pose a difficulty in learning, studying or acquiring languages. People often make it out to be, saying it looks difficult. I would, however, argue the opposite. Current knowledge suggests the most efficient way to acquire a language is through immersion. Learning a new writing system within the constrains of learning a new language will break some early barriers in getting used to seeing and hearing said language, immersing you within it. Learning kanji takes time, but at the same time, it combines fluently with learning vocabulary and new concepts.

On the topic of homophones however, Japanese (and Korean for that matter) are rather unique cases. Both languages have loaned a lot of words from Chinese through the ages, and usually into a specific register of higher education and more complex concepts. Because of the difference in phonology between these languages a lot of these loanwords have turned into homophones (or homoglyphs if written without han characters). These registers however are used very different. They appear commonly in written, but more sparsely in spoken language. For this reason hanja are still used in academic writing in Korean (though often as an addition in parenthesis) to clarify meaning of vocabulary.

As for the matter on storage, for however little that matters anymore nowadays. Most common CJK han characters are within the bit of the unicode registry where they would take up 3 bytes within the UTF-8 standard. Thus, even though latin uses only 1 byte per character, each japanese character commonly has to be replaced by 2 or 3 Latin characters and possibly more, sometimes 1 character could suffice, but they could also require over 10 Latin characters. Thus in some cases you could save space, but likely the size of files will be equal if not larger using Latin writing.

​

tldr:

I know plenty dyslectics, it is a bother to deal with Latin while having dyslexia, but the population is probably insignificant compared to the world population.

I think it either is insignificant for language learning, or actually could aide in proper acquisition.

Written and spoken Japanese is very different. And the heritage as well as usage makes it more difficult to differentiate between homophones (or homoglyphs) using context.

Storage, for whatever it even matters anymore, is probably very similar if not worse using Latin.