[kube-system]

I’m not saying that Amazon should simply avoid harming people with disabilities. I’m going one step further and saying that they should actively help them.

Voice assistants are an obvious solution for people who can’t use other input devices because disability. Yet, Amazon has designed the device as a solution for people who choose not to use other input devices out of mild inconvenience, without any thought to accommodating the former.

They could improve people’s lives with very little marginal effort, yet, they choose not to. This is illegal when you’re building accommodations in the physical world, but sadly, mostly legal in the digital world.

[ghaff]

I don't see the conspiracy to create voice assistants that don't work very well which is what you seem to be complaining about and which, as far as I can see, pretty much everyone on the thread agrees with. Voice assistants just aren't very good so they're mostly mildly useful for people who don't need them for anything important. I'm not sure what you would necessarily do differently to make it more useful for people with disabilities other than making it better, in which case maybe I could actually use it for something useful in my car.

[kube-system]

The above example was a purchase confirmation sent via email. Why couldn’t the device just read it out loud? That’s literally the one thing it’s good at, and I’m sure a blind person would appreciate it.

The reason they don’t is not a conspiracy. It’s because they never considered the needs of the disabled, as many do.

[ghaff]

I actually agree with that example. If I make a purchase etc. on a voice device, I expect an ACK by voice as well.