Nothing says "We care about accessibility and equity for disabled people in STEM like 'Go to Google and let their AI handle it"" #Ableism#DisabledAndSTEM
@ml and the point is not that it is a "zero effort" solution or "not done by human professionals", the point is that AI-generated captions are not good enough in quality to provide sufficient accessibility, and therefore using AI as only accessibility measure is a fucking poor excuse.
🧵 What is this? After pushing UC for 4 years now to quit designing buildings where inaccessibility is the default, a main entrance to a building is wheelchair accessible?
Ah, there's the UC Davis we know. Unnecessary steps because you weren't specifically PAID to do your duty under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act nor to actually make a public university accessible to the public.
Such BS...how can you do research that doesn't question whether the way accessibility is currently being offered is the problem?
This reads more like "Given that we don't want to follow legal bare minimums, how can we put the onus on disabled people & blame them when they 'fall short' as intended?"