Color me Skeptical over The Altman × Ive Merger
The New York Times reported on Wednesday OpenAI, maker of ChatGPT, is acquiring Jony Ive’s startup, called IO, for the astronomical sum of $6.5 billion. As part of the deal, Ive will assume total creative control over design at OpenAI—hardware and software. The acquisition was celebrated with a flowery announcement that included a 9-minute video featuring commentary from both Altman and Ive on their grand new partnership.
At a high level, I have three big takeaways from the Altman-Ive collaboration:
I think the folks saying this a harbinger of Apple’s irrelevancy doth protest way too much. Monetarily alone, Apple is nowhere remotely in danger of becoming passé.
I think two wealthy, white, abled men waxing romantic about living in San Francisco, let alone building technology to empower people, feels really pompous.
I think people generally really like screens—and especially their iPhones—and don’t foresee a clamor to buy whatever it is whenever it starts shipping.
It, of course, is a reference to the prototype device Altman and Ive speak about in the aforementioned video, with Altman saying in part he believes “it is the coolest piece of technology that the world will have ever seen.” The Wall Street Journal reports Altman told OpenAI workers the forthcoming product is “a third core device” between one’s iPhone and MacBook. What’s more, supply chain whisperer Ming Chi-Kuo posted on X he believes the device is slated to enter mass production in 2027, with its form factor “as compact and elegant as an iPod Shuffle” and meant to be worn around the neck.
Given Kuo’s information, I have three more takeaways:
OpenAI’s device seems like it’ll eschew a screen, adopting a voice-first UI.
Design notwithstanding, this feels awfully akin to Humane’s failed AI Pin.
This thing better support accessibility features.
No. 3 is obviously most crucial from my perspective, both as a journalist and as a user. Readers of my old Forbes column may recall I wasn’t kind to Humane co-founders Imran Chaudhri and Bethany Bongiorno about what I characterized as their company’s “lack of clarity” over the accessibleness of its AI Pin. I tried vainly in the last couple years, several times in fact, to get Bongiorno, Humane’s CEO, to speak with me on the record about the product’s accessibility to disabled people like me. I got no response.
You can understand my concern here; I worry Altman and Ive’s fancy new bauble will prove inaccessible too. To its credit, OpenAI has been far more transparent in its support for accessibility, evidenced by its work with Be My Eyes and the work of its software engineering teams to make the mobile app accessible. Nonetheless, accessibility is a master shapeshifter and takes many forms. There are a lot of unanswered questions. If the prototype indeed is voice-centric, how does it accommodate those with non-standard speech or who are nonverbal altogether? If the prototype indeed is neck-worn, how easily does it clasp in terms of fine-motor skills? For those with sensory integration disabilities, how heavy is it? What kind of firmware does the device run? Apple surely isn’t licensing iOS, so is whatever OpenAI’s using under the proverbial hood built with accessibility in mind? These all are mission critical questions that the social media peanut gallery has thus far (predictably) ignored in their zeal to celebrate, and pontificate, over Altman and Ive announcing their joint venture.
I don’t mean to imply Altman and Ive are unfeeling, although I maintain the aura of the introductory video reeks of pretentiousness and an utter lack of self-awareness of each other’s immense privilege. Maybe my worries are misplaced… maybe OpenAI’s so-called “family of devices” will be accessible to all. But therein lies the rub: nobody knows. This is exactly the reason for the disabled community’s general apprehension towards new technology. I felt this way in 2023 about Apple Vision Pro, albeit buoyed by Apple’s proven track record in the accessibility arena. The disabled community are technologists at heart, as Dr. Victor Pineda said to me, but we also realize we are the minorities’ minority. As such, we’re naturally skeptical the abled powers-that-be will be mindful that building technology for ostensibly everyone to feel empowered—as Altman and Ive do in their video—in actuality should include people with disabilities.
I’ve neither met nor interviewed Altman. The same goes for Ive. I’d love to interview both of them, ideally simultaneously, and pepper them with the very questions I’ve laid out in this piece. Covering technology is unlike covering, say, the president as a member of the White House press corps. My friends such as CNN’s Alayna Treene absolutely are upholding the journalistic value of holding power to account because what an administration does obviously has enormous effect on the everyday lives of the citizenry. The stakes in tech journalism are markedly lower, but the journalistic value remains unchanged. In my case, I like to think my work is holding truth to power by questioning (and thus reporting on) whether a device like Altman and Ive’s will be accessible to those who need accessibility for usability. In other words, OpenAI ought to be held accountable for ensuring “everyone” is much more practice than platitude.
I’m happy to Waymo myself across town anytime to find out firsthand.
