The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You • Hacker News Board

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#81

Post by rtkwe » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:54 PM UTC

ggreer wrote: post #13

I thought the idea behind exoskeletons and fancy wheelchairs was that they allow handicapped people to go more places, not to substitute for better infrastructure. I haven't seen any of the companies behind these devices claim that they make such improvements obsolete. And as the post mentions, such infrastructure is useful for anyone with luggage, a stroller, or a hand truck. And yes, the cost of such devices is hig…

What they're getting at is that the individual level gadget based accommodations can lead hurdles against making the world generally more accessible to people with disabilities by putting the onus on the disabled person to buy those gadgets in people's minds, eg "oh we don't need to pay to put ramps here there's stair climbing wheelchairs", ignoring the cost of those devices. Yes they /eventually/ get cheaper but there's still plenty of people who can't afford even the cheaper versions and it takes decades to get there.

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#82

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:54 PM UTC

nitwit005 wrote: post #72

bevr1337 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't hold up to scrutiny because tech companies _do_ provide input at policy level. Sticking to transportation, auto groups and manufacturers were able to popularize "jay walking" a century ago. Tech leadership and politics mingle at the highest levels too. For ex, Trump took Huang, Cook, and Musk with him on a recent trip to China.

> I need better doorknobs and or a ramp. I'm not aware of any tech company lobbying against doorknobs or ramps, and I don't see any particular reason for them to care. There's been some general corporate push back against the expense of some ADA fixes.

[deleted]

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#83

Post by whywhywhywhy » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:55 PM UTC

collinmcnulty wrote: post #14

TulliusCicero wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it kinda feels like a banal thing to hate on. "They're only doing this because it's easier to create a prototype invention than to redo all design standards and enforcement in the country!" I mean, yeah? What exactly is the implied alternative for the sort of individuals targeted by the blog post?

The video of the prototype invention has the effect of making people think they don't need to be concerned about ramps and doorknobs and ADA enforcement because some teen in a garage has just solved this problem forever. People who need accommodations also require the political support of able-bodied people in order to actually make change happen, and his argument is that these videos dissipate that support.

> because some teen in a garage has just solved this problem forever

Isn't really teens in garages perpetuating this is it though, its universities and companies milking government funding.

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#84

Post by meatmanek » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:56 PM UTC

fluoridation wrote: post #58

>every time I see one of these vapid videos. >And watching the video, >I am blind Um... EDIT: Actually, the post reads as if two different people wrote it. The first half doesn't mention anything about blindness, and the second half doesn't mention anything about wheelchairs. But there's only one credit, so I don't know what's going on.

1. it's possible that the author is blind in a legal sense but not completely blind -- e.g. maybe they only have vision in the center of their visual field, or maybe they have low acuity. You'll often see people with white canes wearing glasses, which would be pointless if they had absolutely zero vision.

2. It's not uncommon for people to use terms like "watch", "see", "hear", "listen", etc. colloquially / metaphorically; e.g. "I heard that X did Y" by someone who, pedantically speaking, _read_ that X did Y; someone typing "listen to me" on a chat app when they really mean "please read my words carefully and internalize them"; etc. If I were playing a video on on my phone, listening to what is being said but not actually watching the screen, I'd probably still say I "watched" the video.

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#85

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:58 PM UTC

bluefirebrand wrote: post #57

TulliusCicero wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many "engineer types" will gladly care about doorknobs and infrastructure details. Some will, and that's great, but as the blog post accurately points out, the invention of these things isn't the primary issue, it's the lack of implementation. And that isn't the fault of the engineers designing better doorknobs or ramps. > Tech companies pushed for exactly that outcome and spent a lot on lobbying and convincing. We…

> Trying to blame this on tech companies is a lame excuse. Depends. Do car manufacturers count as tech companies? The obsession with cars and car infrastructure isn't accidental either, it's been manufactured and pushed heavily by car companies over decades. Same with the opposition to public transit. None of this stuff is happening 100% organically, it's being pushed by corporate interests via lobbying with governme…

If someone watched a press video for the RAV4, and responded by saying "Toyota Motor Corporation Hates Me and You" and demanding that Toyota fix the bus routes in their city, I would think that's pretty silly. Everything's interrelated, and no consumer demand is 100% organic, but the linkage is just too remote to make sense.

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#86

Post by ElProlactin » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #6

While I can understand the frustration and the author makes some good points, a lot of the anger feels oddly misplaced. Yes, engineer types want to solve problems with inventions rather than overhauling the entire nation's infrastructure. Maybe, just maybe, that's because inventing something is actually within their grasp, whereas wholesale replacing every civil engineer and architect in the country isn't? Or replaci…

This is why raising well-rounded children is so important. Intelligent young people today are too often encouraged/forced to specialize and while it makes sense for them economically given the structure of our society, it produces lots of young, intelligent adults who can't see the forest for the trees. They can be brilliant in one area but unable to see the big picture, which is a real loss to society when they have the ambition to contribute.

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#87

Post by make3 » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #6

While I can understand the frustration and the author makes some good points, a lot of the anger feels oddly misplaced. Yes, engineer types want to solve problems with inventions rather than overhauling the entire nation's infrastructure. Maybe, just maybe, that's because inventing something is actually within their grasp, whereas wholesale replacing every civil engineer and architect in the country isn't? Or replaci…

this type of individualist responsibility diffusion is exactly why nothing happens in the US, & why France has protests the second the govt does anything bad.

no one is asking you to solve the whole problem, just be part of fighting for the real solution

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#88

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

nemomarx wrote: post #54

TulliusCicero wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll grant you Musk being terrible, no argument there, but that's not tech companies as a whole. And California hardly needed any help to sabotage its HSR, the state's whole process for that kind of development is incredibly backwards and broken, sadly.

it's not really tech companies fault on this either but it sucks to see large amounts of investor money going to them when it could go to solving the issue more efficiently. (although obviously it would be less profitable for the investors so it won't happen) I think thats the core frustration

It all depends on the counterfactual. Could the money solve the problem, if the issues with transportation arent funding?

It seems like an institutionally made black hole that will simply consume anything put into it. I dont think flooding it with more money will fix that problem.

Investors have poured about 10 billion into waymo prior to 2026. That could only have paid for about 5 to 7 miles of urban light rail given recent project costs in Seattle, San Francisco, or New York.

And that's if you completely ignore the challenge around who has the money and assume the state can just collect extra taxes without discontent or impacts

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#89

Post by perpetuallunch » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 6:00 PM UTC

ashleyn wrote: post #69

TulliusCicero wrote: post #6

While I can understand the frustration and the author makes some good points, a lot of the anger feels oddly misplaced. Yes, engineer types want to solve problems with inventions rather than overhauling the entire nation's infrastructure. Maybe, just maybe, that's because inventing something is actually within their grasp, whereas wholesale replacing every civil engineer and architect in the country isn't? Or replaci…

The US has been institutionally dysfunctional for quite some time, so that puts us in an interesting position where it's easier to imagine inventing our way out of social problems with $30,000 servo-filled boxes than it is to imagine ever getting a cheaper and easier solution moved through Congress. Congress rarely seems to pass disruptive changes to law these days. Statehouses are less sclerotic, but not by much. Ma…

[flagged]

Re: The "Disability Dongle": Why Silicon Valley Hates Me and You

#90

Post by overgard » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 6:01 PM UTC

The real problem IMO is for most SV companies, the audience is the investors and the press, not the actual customer. Which I guess kind of makes sense structurally -- if the idea is to grow fast and exit, then you gotta know who butters your bread, but I think it's bad structurally for problem solving and building sustainable businesses. I know in the past "small" businesses got kind of denigrated as "lifestyle" businesses, but I think we structurally need more funding around things that solve real problems but aren't going to "CHANGE EVERYTHING!!!" and maybe only end up worth a few tens of millions instead of billions or trillions.