do you see what i see

i try to play connections ( https://www.nytimes.com/games/connections – it’s free BTW) daily to help with my ‘associative thinking’ , but today it’s pictures instead of the usual words. unfortunately, two don’t ‘seem visible’ to me and one is ‘unclear’ – don’t know if it’s a ‘bug’, i’m using an ‘old’ Mac, or my ‘low vision’…

an AAC app: Day Three

yesterday’s ‘challenges’ made me think. in trying to set-up my ‘old’ Mac desktop for development, certain components needed required me to ‘upgrade’ to a newer model.

while people use ‘backward compatibility’ to sell more units, for users with disabilities as most aren’t ‘financially independent’ this is a ‘major consideration’ as they probably don’t have the ‘disposable income’ to replace their existing phones with a newer model. That said, there are two ‘issues’ here that we shouldn’t conflate: 1. having contributors with ‘more advanced configurations’, and 2. ’cost-effective’ phones that allow users to run the app.

the other thing that made me pause, is despite my own lived experience i defaulted to my ‘primary instinct’ to code first as a former software engineer – call it ‘force of habit.’ it seems more sensible to start with constructing ‘paper prototypes’ to refine requirements. given my ‘challenges in writing’, i’m now looking at digital tools for this to prioritise design, but there’s no reason to completely stop coding so i can also learn from this experience and continue ‘to scratch that itch.’

an AAC app: Day Two

Task(s) done today:

• test update of readMe file, and
• uploaded first React Native app (think it’s right…)

Task(s) underway:

• Configuring development environment in Mac and ‘testing’ first app

an AAC app: Day One (Part C)

have tried downloading and installing the Visual StudioCode app (using React Native for the prototype ) to ‘test modifying’ the readme file in the GitHub project (two birds and all, but still trying to figure this out instead of resorting to do it manually). The month of January has been allocated to a ‘build to learn prototype’ – preparing to throw one away per the software engineering practice. The next month, after experimentation, is meant to help establish ‘baseline requirements’ to inform a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) if you will. Afterwards, succeeding releases are optimistically scheduled at the beginning of each month and deliberately twice the length of a ‘two-week sprint’ as most contributors have a day job’ and some take ‘longer’ for most physical tasks; and to try to build in a ‘midpoint jump’ per the research. Moreover, this timeline isn’t only consistent for users and contributors, and is ‘loosely-based on Steve McConnel’s. Staged Delivery and Design-to-schedule methodologies Finally, you’ll notice i’ve taken ‘a cafeteria-like approach’ to software development and am generally open for discussion of things that may help app ‘quality.’

Have purposely started on Jan. 1 to try and take advantage of what Prof. Katy Milkman of Wharton refers to the ‘fresh start effect.’

I’m usually just ‘productive’ only about four hours a day given my Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) compounded by headaches from recent visual ‘issues’ – it must be due to ‘adrenaline and excitement’ given the amount ‘worked’ today, but I’ll ’surely pay’ for this tonight. i make this ‘explicit’ for two main reasons: 1) to better manage expectations (hence my ‘reliance’ on contributors), 2) as a user with Complex Communication Needs (CCN), i’m hoping to ‘constantly road test’ this and to be empathetic enough that my own use-case is also ‘beneficial’ to others.

when possible, i’ll try to do some work everyday so as to try to form a habit (ufortunately, the research isn’t consistent and spans anywhere from ‘chains of straight days” of three weeks up to 100 days) and as an economic technique known as a commitment device.

an AAC app: Day One (Part B)

here’s the GitHub project link:

https://github.com/LinsAbadia/AAC

i’m currently working on a ReadMe ‘iteration.

an AAC app: Day One

i’m initiating (with the help of some friends) an ‘open source, cross-platform, community-based, app’ for an Augmentative & Alternative Communication (AAC) for the mobile phone. i’m not a ‘big advertiser’, but i’m hoping to ‘pique the interest’ of ‘more potential contributors.

i’ve used GitHub before but mostly not as a ‘primary.’ Have set up a few sites before (a long while ago) as part of MOOCs so i can ‘share’ my code for ‘evaluation.’ My ‘goal’ (given my physical limitations) today is to set-up the project page – will post the link once i’m done. 

two birds, one stone: charity and employing persons with disabilities ???

they say the majority of what you donate to charity just goes to admin. hence, that’s why NGOs like Doctors Without Borders ( i just refer to them as MSF as i can never remember their real name in French ) are ‘good’ in that most of the money actually goes ‘directly’ to the cause you want to support.

someone probably already previously had this thought, but wouldn’t it be an option to ‘outsource’ this part of the ‘operation’? wouldn’t it be a ‘good alternative’ to have an organisation where the primary persons with disabilities did the brunt of ‘backroom functions’ and performed ‘shared services’ among several charities?

in my mind, this would be ‘cheaper’ as:

1. The ‘running cost’ would be spread across several organisations,
2. Some workers would be volunteers, and
3. Because hours of the workers may be less than the ‘typical work-week’ , the rates may be ‘reduced’ (given what industry is likely to charge) .

and this would result in the following ‘benefits’:

1. The actual spend for the cause would be greater,
2. For volunteers, this can make them ‘job-ready’ and provide much needed ‘on-the-job training’ to prepare them to be integrated into the workforce,
3. For paid employees, ‘unavoidable’ admin costs would go to supporting persons with disabilities and
4. Help address some of the fears and hesitancy of potential charitable donors.

of course, a pilot may be necessary as a ‘proof of concept’ to test the viability and limitations of the model.

any ‘constructive’ feedback is welcome – concerns, comments, and suggestions would be much appreciated in developing the idea further.

volunteering with a disability in Australia: experiences and obstacles

i’ve tried looking for ‘non-physical’ paid employment and have ‘not much luck’ so moved on to volunteering opportunities (which I wrongly thought would be ‘easier’). while i see how my disability can impact my physical contribution, it may take a ‘longer time’ to get it out, but my ideas and other ‘information work’ can still benefit an organisation.

i tried enquiring twice already about volunteering but have had no responses. is it my approach? i thought this as when i first migrated to Australia, my resume didn’t attract employers for several months and it was not until i ‘rejigged’ it that i got interviews (and eventually, my last job).

or is it a ‘systemic’ issue? I thought there were more chances to volunteer but this doesn’t seem to be the case (despite making sense to me economically and logically). Here are some issues that i thought of (kindly correct me if i’m wrong):

1. Limited slots. either the government (e.g. additional funding) or organisation (e.g. policy) has ‘imposed limits’,
2. Insurance mandate. a set number of volunteers are only covered by the current policy,
3. Communication overhead. only a particular number can be managed ‘effectively’ by the organisation (this may be from experience), or
4. ‘Ableism’ or some other ‘unconscious bias’. Either they consider it ‘too hard’ (the pandemic has brought to light inequities that exist) or they want to ‘reserve’ slots for able-bodied individuals. this is good article: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210330-the-harmful-ableist-language-you-unknowingly-use?ocid=twwl

i’m not sure if this is only a ‘personal issue’ or aa fairly common one. If it’s the latter then it needs to be addressed IMHO – this is an ‘untapped resource ‘ since the WHO estimates that about 10% of the world’s population identify as having some sort of disability (even if only .01 percent was ‘willing and able to help’, that’s still ~700,000 and even if you ‘equally divide’ it by the seven continents, that’s still ~100k).

Regardless, any insight would be greatly appreciated…

NDIA: on confluence and variation (4 of n)

i’ve listened to Episode 3 (what i refer to as ‘A tale of Two Agencies) of “A Nation Changed with Kurt Fearnley” podcast. if you’re interested, the link is at: https://hireup.com.au/anationchanged/?source=google&medium=paid&campaign=11763859582&adg=115869528924&key=%2Bkurt%20%2Bfearnley&ad=483695209424&position=&type=b&gclid=Cj0KCQiAtqL-BRC0ARIsAF4K3WEUh-b-7WYns3PSnk4nDDTYlYoSzl86p0k08WXAarigHmnLavAtIJMaAn52EALw_wcB . There are four parts and i’ll continue listening as i find it informative.

this documents the ‘extreme ‘ experiences that persons with disabilities have had in dealing with the agency. and while i understand why these anecdotes were chosen to illustrate this dichotomy given practical time-constraints, i suspect that the majority of encounters (like my own) are a ‘mixed-bag’ and fall between the spectrum of these polar opposites. i can’t really fault the producers for taking artistic license and using “the good, the bad, and the ugly” approach as this os both simple and powerful – hell, i’d probably do it myself given the circumstances. it’s hard not to be affected by the legendary story of a government assessor asking an applicant if Downs Syndrome is a permanent condition.

i think it’s useful not to label the entire experience (although quite understandable). it might sometimes be more ‘actionable’ to provide ‘dissected’ feedback. i’m sure there are a lot of stories that outline what works really well and those things that leave a lot to be desired.

NDIA: on confluence and variation (3 of n)

i’ve listened to Episode 2 (what i like to call as politics and ‘birthing pains’ of the NDIS) of “A Nation Changed with Kurt Fearnley” podcast. if you’re interested, the link is at: https://hireup.com.au/anationchanged/?source=google&medium=paid&campaign=11763859582&adg=115869528924&key=%2Bkurt%20%2Bfearnley&ad=483695209424&position=&type=b&gclid=Cj0KCQiAtqL-BRC0ARIsAF4K3WEUh-b-7WYns3PSnk4nDDTYlYoSzl86p0k08WXAarigHmnLavAtIJMaAn52EALw_wcB . There are four parts and i’ll continue listening as i find it informative.

admittedly, it’s ‘problematic’. it reminds me of the old adage: “perfect is the enemy of good.” Sure, it’s not ideal (something seems better than nothing in this case) but supposedly there were (and are) several opportunities for improvement that, overall, seems ‘reasonable’ to me. it was brought forward and the nomenclature of the ‘pilot’ areas were changed for political reasons (i don’t fully subscribe that the justification given was the sole one but that’s a different discussion…).

i knew there were staffing shortages but was, until now, never aware of the extent. the shortfall ‘explained ‘ (and didn’t justify) delays in what i considered straightforward requests. it’s still a bit ‘slow’ (which is understandable given current constraints) but i welcome efforts to gradually increase staffing.

numbers aside, it would be enlightening to know what people think are the other staffing-related issues…