@menelion @RareBird15 The main problem is ignorance and it spreads in every circle. Among sighted users of commercial tech, such as meta, google and so on, there are very few knowing about accessibility existence. They have all their expensive iPhone or iPad in hand, maybe even having to pay dues for that, but they use them to take photos and fight with strangers on social networks. They maybe never explore the "setting" window in deep. Many are also videogamers who live in their own world and comfort zone, and in linux environments there are lots and lots of very smart programmers, maybe even skilled on politics or society, but they don't even have an idea that assistive technology exists.
On linux, too, it's like the crocodile chasing its tail: many blind users don't approach this system because its accessibility functions are quite poor. On the other side, linux developers don't invest in accessibility because they assume there are no users with disability (blind, low vision, physical, etc). And the infinite circle continues.

The situation is very complex: in at least a couple of European countries, I think Denmark and France, they're trying to switch to open source; years ago, I heard of a petition by blind employees who asked them to change their mind on it, because of poor accessibility.

But I think that having public offices switching to open source, can be a boost for those systems, for gaining accessibility. Then the issue reverts: in the meantime? Waiting for accessibility to come? Public offices should find an acceptable compromise. Having Windows for that single person only? Maybe. I'm not good at politics!

You know what the big problem is: they have created accessibility in 1999, then in the 2000s they started creating laws all over the world about it, I'm referring to web and software, now; but no one has seriously considered investing on learning. And making accessibility-related material easy to learn for dummies.
I often say it frankly: what must be made accessible at first, is accessibility. Like privacy and security, it's always placed at the end of a project, but should be in the beginning instead.

And the same is on LGBT, HIV, and so on. They talk empathy, and rethoric, but no one really makes people learn why and what, seriously.

Inclusion must not be made of slogans, the problem is that they never work.