Existing commercial and in-house software development tools are often inaccessible to blind and low vision software professionals (BLVSPs), hindering their participation and career growth at work.Building on existing research on Do-It-Yourself (DIY) assistive technologies and customized tools made by programmers, we shed light on the currently unexplored intersection of how DIY tools built and used by BLVSPs support accessible software development.Through semi-structured interviews with 30 BLVSPs, we found that such tools serve many diferent purposes and are driven by motivations such as desiring to maintain a professional image and a sense of dignity at work.These tools had signifcant impacts on workplace accessibility and revealed a need for a more centralized community for sharing tools, tips, and tricks.Based on our fndings, we introduce the "Double Hacker Dilemma" and highlight a need for developing more efective peer and organizational platforms that support DIY tool sharing.

Older adults are increasingly acquiring smartphones. But acquiring smartphones can be difficult, and little is known about the particular challenges of older adults who are additionally blind or losing their vision. We shed light on the social and technical aspects of acquiring smartphones with vision loss, based on deep qualitative interviews with 22 blind or low vision (BLV) older adults aged 60 and over. Through our grounded theory analysis, we found that BLV older adults experience liminality as they acquire smartphones and transition through re-acquiring smartphones as they become blind, and they can transition through liminality by participating in mutual aid within the blind community. We contribute the notion of “Intersecting Liminality,” which explains the marginalizing experience of simultaneously transitioning through vision loss, aging, and technology acquisition. We contend that Intersecting Liminality can serve as a framework that centers the dynamic nature of disability to help our community generate a more nuanced understanding of technology acquisition and more effective assistive interventions.

Scholars have investigated numerous barriers to accessible software development tools and processes for Blind and Low Vision (BLV) developers. However, the research community has yet to study the accessibility of software development meetings, which are known to play a crucial role in software development practice. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 26 BLV software professionals about software development meeting accessibility. We found four key themes related to in-person and remote software development meetings: (1) participants observed that certain meeting activities and software tools used in meetings were inaccessible, (2) participants performed additional labor in order to make meetings accessible, (3) participants avoided disclosing their disability during meetings due to fear of career repercussions, (4) participants suggested technical, social and organizational solutions for accessible meetings, including developing their own solutions. We suggest recommendations and design implications for future accessible software development meetings including technical and policy-driven solutions.

With remote work becoming a prevalent practice, the use of videoconferencing tools has significantly increased. While the accessibility of these tools in remote work has been studied previously, there is a lack of understanding of how professionals with disabilities conduct meetings using them and what accessibility means in this context. To fill this gap, we investigated the experience and accessibility practices of 18 blind and low vision (BLV) meeting facilitators who regularly use videoconferencing tools. Our findings reveal that BLV professionals undertake several steps to facilitate meetings effectively, including preparing materials in advance, ensuring the security of the meetings, maintaining awareness of attendees’ activity, coordinating with co-hosts to overcome accessibility obstacles, maintaining professionalism, and advocating for accessible meeting practices and technology. We discuss how our findings reveal barriers to career advancement for BLV professionals, help understand the interdependent activity of meeting facilitators and co-hosts, and provide recommendations for making videoconferencing more accessible.