Critical Interface Manifesto, Tenet 11. The standard calls for a universal subject and generates processes of homogenization, but reduces the complexity and diversity. What is not standard?
I thought this one was especially interesting because it actually linked to my Looking Outwards subject in one of the propositions: Surf the web closing your eyes. http://www.eyewriter.org/. Weird because the link is kind of about surfing the web using only your eyes.
I take the tenet to be focused mainly on diversity of interfaces, and mostly on diversity of accessibility options for people who can't use or have difficulty using the "standard" visual-based, keyboard and mouse interface. This is really important, and that's also why I found Eyewriter to be so cool. But the tenet isn't just about accessibility for people with disabilities. It's also about a diversity of ways of presenting information, regardless of the sensory aspect of the interface. For example, if you consider the education system to be an interface in some sense, it's very limited to the "standard" way of learning. Someone might have no disabilities and respond well to visual interfaces, but they might not respond well to the structure of the "interface;" that is, they might not learn much from lectures and tests and homework.
Diversity in all things is necessary to allow the most possible people to enjoy, benefit from, and make use of that thing. I agree with this tenet that computer interfaces seem to lack that diversity, although I think other interfaces, like books (audiobooks, Braille, horror, nonfiction, picture books, etc.), are doing much better. Maybe that's because the information behind other interfaces is simpler, or because computer interfaces haven't been around as long.