#AI accessibility

[techdriveplay]

The Impact of AI on Everyday Life: A New Normal

The impact of AI on everyday life has become a focal point for discussions among tech enthusiasts, policymakers, and the general public alike. This transformative force is reshaping the way we live, work, and interact with the world around us, making its influence felt across various domains of our daily existence. Revolutionizing Workplaces One of the most significant arenas where the impact…

[imporinfo]

AI Unleashes 1,000 New Possibilities for Rare Disabilities: A Revolution is Here!

AI Unleashes 1,000 New Possibilities for Rare Disabilities: A Revolution is Here! Hey there, folks! Have you ever stopped to truly think about what it means to live in a world not quite built for you? Imagine navigating daily life with a condition so rare, so unique, that even medical professionals might scratch their heads. It’s not just about physical barriers; it’s about the countless…

[zentarablog]

10 Common Myths About Artificial Intelligence Debunked

Artificial Intelligence is rapidly becoming one of the most transformative technologies of our time. It powers the recommendation engines that suggest what we should watch, helps doctors diagnose diseases, and even pilots cars. Yet, for all its growing ubiquity, AI remains widely misunderstood. The public discourse is rife with sensationalism, oscillating between utopian promises of a work-free…

[kakief]

Is Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ruining the Planet—or Saving It?

AI’s Double-Edged Impact: Innovation or Environmental Cost? Have you heard someone say, “AI is destroying the environment” or “Only tech giants can afford to use it”? You’re not alone. These sound bites are making the rounds—and while they come from real concerns, they don’t tell the whole story. I’ve been doing some digging. And what I found was surprising, even to me: AI is actually getting a…

[bogkeep]

there's something so deeply dystopian to me how tech companies don't understand that a forced convenience is not a convenience at all. i'm sure autocorrect is helpful for many, but a function that forcibly changes my actual written words and punctuation is taking away my language. photo filters can be nice but i need to choose using them myself or else i have lost the ability to take the picture i want. i don't want a machine to draw or write for me. taking away the option for me to do things manually feels like violence!!!! all this talk of endless opportunity, why are you RESTRICTING me

[kaiju-krew]

make art, wussy

[maodun]

shout out to machine learning tech (and all the human-input adjustment contributors) that's brought about the present developmental stage of machine translation, making the current global village 地球村 moment on rednote小红书 accessible in a way that would not have been possible years ago.

[lightningshrikes]

if i see one more person say gen ai is an accessibility tool im gonna hit whoever it is with a car

[10001gecs]

one 100 word email written with ai costs roughly one bottle of water to produce. the discussion of whether or not using ai for work is lazy becomes a non issue when you understand there is no ethical way to use it regardless of your intentions or your personal capabilities for the task at hand

with all due respect, this isnt true. *training* generative ai takes a ton of power, but actually using it takes about as much energy as a google search (with image generation being slightly more expensive). we can talk about resource costs when averaged over the amount of work that any model does, but its unhelpful to put a smokescreen over that fact. when you approach it like an issue of scale (i.e. "training ai is bad for the environment, we should think better about where we deploy it/boycott it/otherwise organize abt this) it has power as a movement. but otherwise it becomes a personal choice, moralizing "you personally are harming the environment by using chatgpt" which is not really effective messaging. and that in turn drives the sort of "you are stupid/evil for using ai" rhetoric that i hate. my point is not whether or not using ai is immoral (i mean, i dont think it is, but beyond that). its that the most common arguments against it from ostensible progressives end up just being reactionary

i like this quote a little more- its perfectly fine to have reservations about the current state of gen ai, but its not just going to go away.

[chubbidust]

smollusk grows up

[getvalentined]

There's a post going around bsky about how to "somewhat AI proof your work" that tells authors to create a custom work skin that disables the ability for text in their fic to be selected, meaning it can't be copy-pasted, which means it can't be scraped.

This is only true in the weakest sense, and I'm putting this out before I see it hit over here because it will not work, and in fact it will kill accessibility to your fic.

See, in your preferences dashboard, you can literally disable custom work skins with a single tickybox:

So all anyone has to do is select that option and they can continue to copy your fics into shatGPT to their heart's content.

You know what doing this does do, though? It makes it impossible for screenreaders to scan your fic for vision-impaired readers. I hope that most of them already have this option selected, but for those that don't, they may not even be aware it exists, and you've cut them off in exchange for "AI protection" on-par with a wet paper towel.

I hate genAI as much as anyone, but don't fucking do this.

[psychopomp-recital]

Unpopular Opinion Time

The doodle you make or the picrew you use, the poorly executed poetry or basic bare bones prayer will ALWAYS be better than AI generated offerings.

I am sick of having my feed flooded with practitioners, pagans and other polytheists using AI. Specifically deities like Brigid should never be offered AI in my opinion, it’s essentially a slap in the face.

AI generated spells aren’t shit, it’s what a computer assumes will work based off of what it can gather from internet trends and research. MAKE IT YOURSELF, ask a human for help anything but AI.

There is no place for Artificial Intelligence in these spaces.

[transtabletop]

Frankly I find the argument that AI makes art “more accessible” to disabled people insulting and infantilizing and a way for able-bodied people to use disabled people as a prop to explain why they should be able to cheat but we’re not ready for that conversation.

[t00thpasteface]

absolutely sick and twisted to see a community get recommended to me for queer people to "express themselves" with ai. politicians all across the globe coordinate plots to eradicate our communities and yall want to outsource your own creative thinking to luxury software products? what the hell is wrong with you?

[ettle]

Hey from one disabled person to another:

If one accessibility device available to me used ten thousand bagillion pounds of precious water, stole from a bunch of people who didn't consent, led to mass economic disaster for millions including my fellow disabled people, AND was objectively just shitty and poor quality, I wouldn't want to use it or advocate for it in any way. I'd maybe look at other accessibility devices.

[rohirric-hunter]

It's so funny to me when I tell people, "You can't depend on an AI for that, it has to be done by a human," they're always like, "You're just afraid of technology." I'm not afraid of it. I understand it. And I know that an AI is never going to be able to comprehend things like context, which come naturally to a human and are essential to all kinds of information gathering and parsing.

Like yeah, there are uses for AI technology. The bread-sorting computer comes to mind. But that doesn't mean I want an AI to analyze the results of my google searches. Last night I googled, "Where to find iron ore minecraft," and Google's AI told me to dig 15 blocks down from anywhere and promised me that 100% I would find iron ore. Because the computer lacks the ability to look at phrases like "y level 15" and go, "huh, I wonder what that means, maybe I should look that up." It also lacks the ability to get the first apparent answer (y level 15) and then think that there might be more information (likelihood of spawning, size of spawns) and keep reading for that information. It doesn't know that's relevant information. And you can't teach these skills to a computer. People think that you can solve these problems by simply feeding more information into the computer but you can't. It just confuses it. And even if you could, what's the proposition? To fill a computer with the sum total of all human knowledge? I trust I don't have to say why that's a bad idea? The only thing you can do is manually block bad answers and replace them with good ones. By a human. Which means that all of those fixed answers... are not AI generated. :/