As the chair of the Research and Development committee, I sometimes receive
calls from people who want to produce various kinds of technology for the
blind. Last month, I received such a call from a company called,
"Autonomous Effects". I was asked for my thoughts on the production of an
electronic guide dog. How useful would it be, what issues would come up
when discussing the idea with other blind people, and, of course, what were
the potential funding sources for such a project. I tried to answer these
questions in a reasonable fashion, siting many of my more learned
colleagues from this list. Eventually, I came to speak with Monnett Soldo,
an expert in computer science and robotics, as well as a founding member of
the California based company. She explained, in some detail, how she
envisioned the device working.
It would be a device, about the size of a full-sized suitcase which would
be equipped with a handle capable of moving around enough to convey travel
information to the blind traveler. In addition to being able to sense
obstacles, changes in terrain, and to monitor traffic signals, the device
would be able to determine its location in the U.S. to within plus or minus
one meter. In addition to using visual and other sensers on the exterior
body of the case to detect obstacles and terrain, the device would use a
techniqued called, "differential gps" to fine tune its position relative
to the information provided by the gps satelites located around the
equator. With the proper database, the device would not only be able to
tell you which intersection you were standing on, but which corner of that
intersection you were standing on.
Autonomous Effects is currently using this technology on another outdoor
robotic product. Currently, they require a ground based transmitter
located in a well-known visible location to achieve the extreme accuracy.
Monnett believes, however, that the U.S. government will put facilities in
space to allow people to achieve this level of accuracy on a continental level
within ten years. if the Device is unable to use the ground-based
transmitter, or its next generation replacement, then it will fall back to
using standard GPS, and the accuracy that implies.
With this description in mind, allow me to discuss the issues I raised
on the telephone so that you will all be aware of the topics that have
already been touched on. Also, Ms. Soldo is on our R&D mailing list, so
should be reading this message, as well as any followup commentary that may
come up. Finally, I hope that Ms. soldo will feel free to jump in with her
own comments and corrections to my description of the device. Let us have
no miss-representation of what we're talking about. Last but not least,
please, Ms. Soldo, accept my apology for letting this sit dormant for so
long before getting it out to the list.
With these caviats in mind, here's what I said.
1. The device must be cheap, reliable, robust, and easily replacable.
2. since the technology the device uses for navigation only works, for the
most part, out of doors, the device would need to provide a good deal of
functionality in addition to its navigational assistance in order for it to
retain any useful value inside buildings, aboard airplanes, inside
underground parking garages, or at sea.
3. Since we're talking about a self-propelled device, the problem of
stairs and terrains where wheels just won't work needs to be solved.
4. When asked about what kind of guide dog replacement this might make,
I responded that I wasn't sure. For one thing, it is my belief, and
please, guide dog users jump in and correct my misconception, that there is
more than a utilitarian attachment between a guide dog and his user.
Certainly, I said, a self-propelled electronic travel robot wouldn't solve
that problem.
I was then asked if the product would be made more tenable if, rather than
selling it outright, the company leased its units to blind people,
providing 24 hour replacement if necessary when it broke down. I said that
might make the product more attrractive if the price were low enough. It
would have to be low enough for cane users to make them be willing to fork
over the monthly fees and it would have to be low enough for guide dog
users to give them more money to play with each month, given that guide dog
users are given some monthly allotment for the upkeep of their guide dogs
from the federal government.
As a closing comment, I said that the device, in whole, did not sound very
different from the one Tim Cranmer described in his January 1994 talk at
the NFB International Technology conference. (I've sent her this article
in a separate e-mail message.) I also suggested that she might find Woody
Allan's movie, Sleeper, an interesting diversion to this conversation. I
finally asked her if it would be all right to talk about this thing on the R &
D mailing list. She said she would be very interested in carrying on an
electronic dialogue and indicated interest in being on the list in general.
So, Monnett Soldo (msoldo@afx.com) is on our mailing list and ready for a
genuine introduction to the various views on travel aids which abound here.
Let me be clear here. This is to provide education and awareness, not
soap boxing and flaming. With that said, let's explore this concept, its
merits, its disadvantages, its potentials and its weaknesses. As a cane
user, I want to hear from the guide dog users here and understand what
issues it brings to their table.
Take it away, colleagues. :)
-Brian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST