4 ms·
you didnt address it, you proclaimed that products wont be inclusive (whatever that means) unless you have someone advocating for it, which you then describe as
by anon12345690 9y ago
you didnt address it, you proclaimed that products wont be inclusive (whatever that means) unless you have someone advocating for it, which you then describe as having someone who looks different.
its not like people cant understand other perspectives, its not that hard, and focus/user groups would catch all the of examples you cite, just like any QA testing catches bugs and edgecases
- joshuamorton 9y ago>you didnt address it, you proclaimed that products wont be inclusive (whatever that means) unless you have someone advocating for it, which you then describe as having someone who looks different. And gave examples of that happening. Repeated, continued examples in the same context (facial processing). >its not like people cant understand other perspectives, its not that hard, and focus/user groups would catch all the of examples you cite But empirically they don't. Yes, they should. But they don't. This keeps happening, which would imply that the user groups aren't actually catching these examples, or maybe they are, but again without an advocate, a single complaint, or even some complaints, doesn't matter. So let me ask you, who is more likely to advocate for changes to fix a bug: an engineer who is directly affected by that bug, or one who isn't?