Really letting the perfect be the enemy of the good here. No, we can't let people attempt new inventions, some of which may actually help, because the mere fact that people will see them may result in less attention for more basic, important stuff.

Is there solid evidence that TED talks about stair-climbing wheelchairs undermine actual regulations and investments in ramps, or is this more of a "my source is that I made it up" kind of situation?

▲

Lalabadie a day ago | parent | next [-]

You replied "Letting perfect be the enemy of good" several times in the comments here. I think the sentence works against the arguments you're making:

Perfect is the promise of a climb-everywhere-wheelchair. It's hypothetical, dreamed up, and causing people to forego the immediate and good solution (ramps).

▲

bluGill a day ago | parent [-]

You are also making the assumption that the hypothetical climb-everywhere-wheelchair is better than a ramp.

The ramp is easier to make safe, and so we need to ask about safety if it works most of the time. This also gets into maintenance, the robot with moving parts is expected to have more parts to break.

The ramp's batteries will never go dead (or if they do it doesn't matter since they are only for lights anyway?).

	▲	a day ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

lkey a day ago | parent | prev [-]

There's a consistent pattern of people 'solving' a minority population's 'problems' without ever looking at what problems they actually have.

I have 'solid evidence' from my time in industry where heedlessly pursuing 'innovation' got companies (including my own) sued back into compliance with the ADA. Along with deserved lost contracts and managerial beheadings.

Higher profile examples of TED talk 'innovation' killing 'the good' would be the proposed CA 'hyperloop' talk, white paper, and project scuttling high-speed rail investment for another decade plus.

What are your bona fides now that you've brought up your familiarity with both perfection and good?