Post #3732969

2026-06-20 13:00 UTC

This is a challenge to everyone who says that generative AI is unethical, that it's an indictment of the software industry, etc. What are we going to do about the fact that at least one group, blind people, is now effectively using LLM-based coding agents to vibe-code solutions to accessibility problems? Maybe that *is* an indictment of how the software industry neglects accessibility and the needs of blind people. And of the complexity of "real programming". What will we do about it?

Replies (4)

@matt@toot.cafe 2026-06-20 13:01

I, for one, am not going to criticize the people who are using the most effective tool they have, or tell them (as I once did, or at least implied through a badly written toot) that they should be angry at the companies who are developing those tools.

Open ##3732968
@ToniBarth@troet.cafe 2026-06-20 13:10

@matt@toot.cafe For me personally, my benefit doesn't really outclass the fact that other people right now, and we in the long-run will most likely suffer because of this absurd growth and excessive waste of power, because AI is built on quantity, not quality. I don't think its going away, and I think we will have to get used to it, I just wished it was built more slowly and more thoughtful than it is right now.

Open ##3734027
@burnoutqueen@todon.nl 2026-06-20 16:39

@matt@toot.cafe it is unethical that blind people have to vibe code bullshit (that might not even be maintainable) with a computer program that is literally killing the planet, just to use a computer

Open ##3734177
@thankfulmachine@oldbytes.space 2026-07-11 06:06

@matt@toot.cafe This is absolutely a solvable problem and we don’t need LLMs to solve it. Does the FOSS universe have something like a repository of accessibility needs and patterns to address them? Kind of like the MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration but for accessibility?

Open ##3734332