[sudo-discuss] Fwd: [sudo-info] reaching out from google.org regarding an assistive technology hackathon

Wed Jun 24 20:54:35 PDT 2015

Instead of arguing, could we instead *be thankful* that google is willing
to sponsor healthcare innovation, and not distributing the cash as
dividends to their shareholders like most of corporate america?

Seriously guys.

---
Adam Munich -- Inventor, Physicist, Engineer
Web: http://adammunich.com
Tel: +1-650-452-0554

Be • knowledgeable •  social • patient • fearless • compassionate • fun •
humble • forgiving.
Be a leader

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Cere Misc <cere.misc at gmail.com> wrote:

> PS.
>
> Looks like they've switched to the hangouts API:
> https://developers.google.com/+/hangouts/api/ and it's not clear to me
> that there codec platform is open anymore based on looking at the reference
> functions/classes.
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Cere Misc <cere.misc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One idea I have had for a long time now is that there should be a special
>> audio codec used in phone communication for the elderly.  Since it's often
>> the case that hearing loss degrades in ways that are spectrally
>> predictable, it should, in theory, be very possible to tune codecs to
>> present speech (and audio generally) in such a way that an elderly person
>> could hear it much better.  Last time I looked at this, I couldn't find
>> anyone who was trying to tackle this via open APIs, etc.
>>
>> I personally, would love to better be able to talk to my aging relatively
>> over the phone without having to repeat myself over and over.  That is,
>> assuming that the goddam phone network provides enough basic bandwidth to
>> get the data across successfully.
>>
>> Since google is the one who is looking for solutions, then they should be
>> game to collaborate on a project where a group attempts to alter the Speex
>> codec for that purpose.
>> https://developers.google.com/talk/open_communications#codecs
>>
>> .02
>> Cere
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Ryan <yandoryn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh my fucking god. I really, really hate this response.
>>>
>>> First of all, this entire idea revolves around the idea that there are
>>> no disabled folks in tech. That the only way tech advances can happen is if
>>> we get together the "need-knowers" and those with the "skills" can we find
>>> "solutions" to the "problem" of disability. Yes, there are a lot of
>>> scare-quotes in there. It's because I'm rolling my eyes so fucking hard
>>> right now. It's stupidly infantilizing. On top of that, Google is
>>> specifically saying they don't want to deal with solutions we can do now,
>>> they want to come up with "new and innovative" solutions, which separate
>>> the disabled community further, Otherizing them, and not countering the
>>> social model of disability.
>>>
>>> What do I want them to do?
>>>
>>> I'd first of all like them to actually engage with the disabled
>>> community before going out with their hearts on their sleeves with the sob
>>> story of what disability is like to show everyone how much Google cares.
>>> Because honestly, that's all I see in this. "Google cares so much about the
>>> disabled community that they're interested in coming up with solutions that
>>> can't be realized right now." And in doing so, they're ignoring the fact
>>> that there are so many things they, Google, could be doing right now to
>>> actually help the disabled community with technology that is stable and
>>> exists, rather than "help us out" with "cutting-edge" technology.
>>>
>>> They could make it easier to access transcripts of YouTube videos.
>>> They could identify where there are, and aren't, curb cuts on streets.
>>> They could identify where there are crosswalks.
>>> Where there are lights to cross a busy street.
>>> They could see what businesses have a universal access sign in their
>>> window.
>>>
>>> And those are things that they could easily do with their own technology
>>> that I can think of off the top of my head that would simply help me.
>>>
>>> But no, they don't want me to identify those needs because they're not
>>> "innovative" and the technology isn't exciting enough.
>>>
>>> Why do they need to use more exciting technology? Because that's the
>>> shit that hits the papers. There's a reason you hear about exoskeletons and
>>> 3D printed prostheses in the news. They're exciting to able-bodied,
>>> neurotypical people who want to simultaneously feel good and be able to
>>> ignore the disabled community.
>>>
>>> You know what would be fucking revolutionary? What if Google did a
>>> hackathon for disabled techies? Rather than making the disabled community
>>> ingratiated to those wonderful techies who reach out with all their charity
>>> in order to help those who are under-privileged? That entire fucking
>>> narrative is what I deal with every day. When I need help, I fucking ask
>>> for it. But here's the irony: when I do need help, half the time I don't
>>> get it. And when I don't need help, I constantly have it forced on me by
>>> people in "good faith" who feel that their drive to help me is more
>>> important than my desires or needs.
>>>
>>> Also, calling overt ableism a "misstep" is really fucking gross. Really
>>> gross.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Patrick O'Doherty <p at trickod.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So anyone who reaches out in good faith, asking for feedback and
>>>> community engagement, but who missteps should be shunned and boycotted.
>>>> That seems a tad extreme and counterproductive.
>>>>
>>>> What do you want them to say yes to, specifically in relation to
>>>> creating an event like this?
>>>> On 24 Jun 2015 6:08 pm, "Ryan" <yandoryn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I can never understand why outright ableism is treated so differently
>>>>> than other forms of prejudice.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Google had put together a hackathon where we swapped out
>>>>> "disability" for "black," "women," or "queer," no one would quietly be
>>>>> talking about how we should "explore the opportunity" so we can bring them
>>>>> around. We'd be livid and working to boycott the project in general.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is it about ableism that allows us to grin and bear it, and look
>>>>> for the long game rather than demanding short-term action? Why is the
>>>>> disabled community asked to be quiet and meek, while their "allies" do just
>>>>> as much damage as those who openly admit that they see us as objects or
>>>>> unworthy of life?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, and it's not the "tech industry" that largely ableist. It's pretty
>>>>> much every industry out there.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Vicky Knox <vknoxsironi at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm no longer in town but I have something to say.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this is a good opportunity to explore. I hear your concerns
>>>>>> about their approach, Ryan. I am particularly irked by the inspirational
>>>>>> music in the video. *shudders*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, I would love to take this opportunity to transmit our
>>>>>> collective concerns and critiques to them...call it "hacking their
>>>>>> framing". :] Whether one likes it or not, these folks have a lot of power
>>>>>> in shaping popular technology development and understandings into the
>>>>>> future. While we may not revolutionize Google, we can at least encourage
>>>>>> them to do their bidding in a way that is a little less evil.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm happy that they're directly reaching out to hackerspaces, which
>>>>>> means they may take notes. I'm also happy that they're reaching out to us
>>>>>> because our social ecosystem is quite a bit more diverse than theirs and
>>>>>> therefore has more potential for wisdom (I wonder, have they reached out to
>>>>>> Mothership or LOL?). The tech industry (or any business that requires a
>>>>>> steep social capital (whiteness, maleness, ability to work 40+ hours/week,
>>>>>> etc.) in order to have a better (or any) chance at getting employed), after
>>>>>> all, is largely ableist and culturally stagnant. Please excuse my nesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Currently Reading
>>>>> <https://www.goodreads.com/user/email_signature_destination/35215676?utm_medium=reading_link&utm_source=email_signature>
>>>>> [image: Book Cover]
>>>>> <https://www.goodreads.com/user/email_signature_destination/35215676?utm_medium=cover&utm_source=email_signature>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Currently Reading
>>> <https://www.goodreads.com/user/email_signature_destination/35215676?utm_medium=reading_link&utm_source=email_signature>
>>> [image: Book Cover]
>>> <https://www.goodreads.com/user/email_signature_destination/35215676?utm_medium=cover&utm_source=email_signature>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20150624/935a26ad/attachment.html>