At risk of sounding like a SJW here, I think it's an interesting point you made that merits further discussion.
It seems to me that you're arguing about blind people as a market segment. By virtue of being blind there might always be products that blind people just won't benefit from, I get that.
But there's a reason (offline) accessibility is regulated by law and somewhat incorporated into daily life (e.g. wheelchair ramps). If it weren't, blind people (and others with disabilities) would be even more marginalized than they already are.
Would it be okay if Walmart made their stores inaccessible to blind people? I guess they already do, it seems pretty difficult to navigate those aisles with product tags.
While modern life outside of the internet has been developed for a long time, the internet is still relatively fresh, and making sure those who are blind aren't prevented from participating in the internet is generally a good thing, I think.
But perhaps your stance is that the problems of those with disabilities should not be the responsibility of those who do not have those problems, which is a valid argument.
Alt tags don't change whether blind people can see and they're not supposed to either, but they do allow people who would otherwise be prevented from being a customer, to be one.
You don't have to sell paintings to blind people, but they do buy them; 3D paintings, extra-textured paintings, even paintings with braille.
Selling charts to visualize data is a certain way of making data more accessible to certain customers, why not extend that to the visually impaired?
>Just because some people can't use a product, doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to sell it.
You're definitely allowed to sell a product, the question is: should you be allowed to exclude potential customers based on factors they cannot control? Marginalized groups have better lives than they used to in history, but I'd argue a lot of progress can still be made.
Whether the onus should be on the people (blind or not) themselves, corporations or the government, is a very different discussion about responsibility and the limits of choice that I'm not gonna go into here.
Again, I do see your point as well. Just wanted to point out some things.
"Selling charts to visualize data is a certain way of making data more accessible to certain customers, why not extend that to the visually impaired?" Royally messing up a product for the blind by not hiring real blind people would be worse. Without the market data that this would help the product survive, it's hard to take this as seriously as it demands. There's a reason people build for people like themselves - it's surprisingly easy to get things wrong for people unlike you
How do you sell paintings to blind people? Maybe the answer is — you don’t.
If you’re selling charts to visualize data, blind people aren’t your audience.
Just like if you’re selling shovels to dig ditches, you’re not marketing to people in wheelchairs.
Just because some people can’t use a product, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be allowed to sell it.