Yeah, no. You cannot trust "AI". So asking those with disabilities to trust it is dangerous. And even worse, this is used as an out to not introduce actual accessibility options so you can save money.

Yeah there are some legit good use cases for AI. One of my siblings is dyslexic, an AI bot that can read text out loud would have been fantastic for school. Would be great for them driving, if they had something that was reading aloud the signs they looked at. But I don't think this is possible in a capitalist system because the company providing that AI would also be selling all the data it collected. It would start reading the signs the company wanted first like ads

Yes, all disabled people have the same ability.

None of them need accessibility tools like image descriptions and segmentation, or dictation and writing assistance.

You got me.

Enough with the deliberate bad faith takes. You're not fooling anyone. It's just infantile.

The point is that pick any disability you can imagine, and you'll find people with that disability creating art. And creating art in countless fields and media. Is it easier to get an LLM to vomit out an image for you? Sure. But again, the same thing applies to non-disabled people.

This has nothing to do with having a disability. It has everything to do with being lazy.

I never ever said anything to the contrary of that.

I said generative ai can be used to help disabled people.

For one example, I've seen posts by blind folks using AI to vibe code scripts that fill gaps in accessibility solutions.

It's not hard stuff to code, it's just that coders with the skill to fix it upstream either don't understand the issue, or don't give a shit.

How dare a disabled person use a tool I dislike!

You could ask OP.

God forbid a disabled person use a tool to aid themselves, might as well hate on TTS programs and motorized wheelchairs.

Watch, they'll claim they don't dislike the disabled person, but also will shit talk them more than an able person.

So there's tech that I think is both bad for society and incredibly unethical in it's creation and propagation that is nothing to say of the utter privacy nightmare it poses for its users.

But all of this is now okay so long as the person using it is from a disadvantaged enough background?

Like, I understand that we want to make extra effort in order to accommodate those with disabilities in our society and part of that can be some moral compromise.

But surely this has limits, no? In fact I know that those limits exist.

But is it really ableism to defer to those?

I'm not saying that the person you encountered wasn't ableist. But there is a lot more nuance there than "people who hate 'AI' are ableist by default". The same way that people who are in favour of abolishing cars in their city are not doing so to specifically take mobility options away from paraplegics.