Maybe an analogy to explain myself.
Cars were invented for people with sufficient use of their limbs and eyesight. After their invention, the control systems were adapted for people who, for instance, can't use their legs. I don't know of any way they have been adapted for e.g. blind people. And yet, even though they are not accessible to a large fraction of disabled people, the world is better off with cars, designed for not-disabled people and then adapted as far as possible, than without cars.
That's all I'm getting at. Its too much of a constraint on invention, but likely to be adaptable later.
Re:Impending kOS (2014)
by DoreenMichele on Saturday June 22, 2019 @10:58PM
(#20253012)
A. It's more complicated than that.
B. If it wasn't clear, I'm generally on your side here.
Most of the standard conviences available to "normal" people because smartphones are a thing and yadda is how I make my life work.
Among other things, I also co-own a tiny list for blind developers. So I have some familiarity with the fact that there are people who actually need accessible design in a way that I don't.
But I think any internet that works well dramatically improves life for the vast majority of the 60 percent of people who have varying degrees of impairment, two-thirds of whom do not self identify as disabled or handicapped.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19811988#19815635