A roadmap for accelerators

Mike's Notes

It's getting busy, so I need a roadmap for accelerators now.

Resources

  • Resource

References

  • Reference

Repository

  • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library >
  • Home > Handbook > 

Last Updated

27/03/2026

A roadmap for accelerators

By: Mike Peters
On a Sandy Beach: 27/03/2026

Mike is the inventor and architect of Pipi and the founder of Ajabbi.

Lots of opportunities are coming in.

This is a roadmap for using coaching, workshops, incubators and accelerators to develop, test and validate the Ajabbi Mission Business Model and the Pipi closed-core and Pipi open-source applications.

It is sorted by deadline. The first row of the table is a key.

Date Roadmap

deadline

Start-End

Status

Title

Description

What

To come.

  • To come

Learned

  • To come

Resources


deadline

2017-2020

Read and tried everything

Steve Blank

"Steve Blank (born 1953) is an American entrepreneur, educator, author and speaker. He created the customer development method that launched the lean startup movement. His work has influenced modern entrepreneurship through the creation of tools and processes for new ventures, which differ from those used in large companies."

What

Learning from the very best.

  • Reading his books and blog
  • Watching videos
  • Using all the free courses and tools

Learned

  • How to use a Business Model Canvas
  • How to use a Mission Model Canvas
  • How to do customer discovery
  • How to run experiments to validate assumptions

Resources

deadline

2020-2023

Attended

KiwiSaaS

Online workshops and random monthly meetings with other founders.

What

Monthly online meeting with a random founder to chat.

  • To come

Learned

  • To keep going
  • It is OK to make mistakes
  • Lots of insights from being open
  • Importance of listening to others

Resources

January 2024

January - October 2024

Completed

Startup Aotearoa

"Startup Aotearoa ignites New Zealand’s entrepreneurial spirit by providing personalised one-to-one coaching to early-stage startup founders. Delivered nationwide through local regional providers,"

What

Mentoring from Mr G led to testing the ICP at Waimumu Southern Field Days 2024 on

  • Developers at Agritech companies
  • Agricultural suppliers

Learned

  • Developers are the ICP
  • Find a teaching customer

Resources

February 2025

February 2025 - March 2025

Completed

NZTE Export Essentials SaaS 4-part workshop. NZTE Position for Growth workshop.

What

Workshops with individual follow-up sessions.

Learned

  • To come.

Resources

April 2024

May - November 2024

Completed

Creative HQ's On the Business workshop series

Workshop series

What

Remote workshops using Milo canvas.

Learned

  • To come.

Resources

25/03/2026

April 2026 - March 2028

Application Withdrawn

Google AI Accelerator

"With this program, you can get access to startup experts, your Google Cloud and Firebase costs covered up to $200,000 USD (up to $350,000 USD for AI startups) over 2 years, technical training, business support, and Google-wide offers."

What

Collaborate with DeepMind to run wild ML integration experiments to go where no developer has gone before.

  • Pipi > IaC > GCP
  • Pipi > VM > BoxLang > Workspaces
  • Pipi > MCP > DeepMind Gemini
  • Pipi > Scientific Workflows > TPU

Learned

  • Invited to apply by a Google chap who was assisting behind the scenes using an unlisted pathway. I then discovered that free credits begin on the day of application approval, so I will reapply when ready to start in July to make the most of the 24-month window of opportunity.
  • Increase Pipi DevOps 1000x by completing work on the data centre, workspace rendering, and IaC to GCP free tier. This will enable fast, multiple automated experiments.

Resources

    29/03/2026


    May-June

    Application underway

    Access Activator

    "Whaikaha, in collaboration with Creative HQ, is piloting Access Activator to find, fund and grow accessibility solutions from across New Zealand."

    What

    Test personalised accessible UI based on the GOV.UK Design System using paper mockups for

    • Autistic
    • Colour Blindness
    • Dyslexic
    • Epilepsy
    • Irlen
    • Physical & Motor Disabilities
    Involve
    • Local disabled community
    • National support organisations for Autism, Dyslexia, Muscular Dystrophy, etc

    Learned

    • To come.

    Resources

    31/03/2026

    April-May

    Applied

    Creative Tech Activate

    "Designed for teams at the idea stage, this 8-week pre-accelerator programme supports founders to validate their concept, build an early prototype and/or actionable technology roadmap, connect with first customers and partners, and learn how to build a scalable business using proven startup tools."

    What

    Test screen production workspace using HTML Mockups on

    • Local Film Industry Community

    Learned

    • To come.

    Resources

    26/05/2026

    July - November 2026

    Application underway

    Sprout Accelerator

    "The Sprout Accelerator takes a cohort of agrifood innovators on a 3-month adventure to discover, articulate and refine the foundations to grow global startups."

    What

    Test farm management workspace using HTML Mockups

    • Dairy Farmer Catchment Group
    • Agritech wait list from Waimumu

    Learned

    • To come.

    Resources

    June 2026

    July 2026 - June 2028

    To Apply

    Google AI Accelerator

    "With this program, you can get access to startup experts, your Google Cloud and Firebase costs covered up to $200,000 USD (up to $350,000 USD for AI startups) over 2 years, technical training, business support, and Google-wide offers."

    What

    Collaborate with DeepMind to run wild ML integration experiments to go where no developer has gone before.

    • Pipi > IaC > GCP
    • Pipi > VM > BoxLang > Workspaces
    • Pipi > MCP > DeepMind Gemini
    • Pipi > Scientific Workflows > TPU

    Learned

    • To come.

    Resources

    July 2028

    Start-End

    To apply

    Y Combinator

    "The overall goal of YC is to help startups really take off. They arrive at YC at all different stages. Some haven't even started working yet, and others have been launched for a year or more. But whatever stage a startup is at when they arrive, our goal is to help them to be in dramatically better shape 3 months later."

    What

    How to scale from tiny to very large.


    Learned

    • To come

    Resources


       


       

      Continental Drift

      Mike's Notes

      This is an example of a Notebook from Observable embedded on this page using an iFrame.

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > Observable Newsletter
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      26/03/2026

      Continental Drift

      By: Nicolas Lambert
      Observable: 02/2026

      Hi. I'm Nicolas Lambert, research engineer in geographic information science at CNRS (France). My job is to draw maps and teach cartography at the university. I am a geographer 🌎, and not really a developer 🖥️.

      This notebook compresses 750 million years of continental drift in a mesmerizing animation. It includes current country boundaries, so as the animation loops, you can follow how different regions emerged over time.

      Four autism subtypes map onto distinct genes, traits

      Mike's Notes

      Note

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > The Transmitter
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      26/03/2026

      Four autism subtypes map onto distinct genes, traits

      By: Giorgia Guglielmi
      The Transmitter: 17/07/2025
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.53053/BZOX1294

      Giorgia Guglielmi is a freelance writer covering the life sciences, biomedicine and science policy. Her stories have appeared in Nature, Science, NOVA Next and other publications.

      Giorgia has an M.Sc. in science writing from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Ph.D. in biology from the European Molecular Biology Laboratory.

      An analysis of more than 5,000 autistic children and their siblings underscores the idea that autism can be understood as multiple conditions with distinct trajectories.

      Autism has long been seen as a single—if highly heterogeneous—condition. But rather than one continuous spectrum, there are distinct autism subtypes, each tied to its own genetic signature, a new study suggests.

      The research, published 9 July in the journal Nature Genetics, connects genetic differences to specific patterns in how autism traits appear, supporting the notion that there are “many autisms,” says Michael Lombardo, senior researcher of neurodevelopmental disorders at the Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia in Genoa, Italy, who was not involved in the work.

      Identifying the genes linked to autism subtypes is just the beginning, Lombardo says. The real challenge now, he adds, “is unraveling the biology that stems from those genes.”

      The researchers, led by Olga Troyanskaya, professor of computer science and integrative genomics at Princeton University and deputy director for genomics at the Flatiron Institute in New York City, used a computational model to analyze data on 5,392 autistic children aged 4-18 years and their non-autistic siblings collected through the SPARK study. (The Flatiron Institute and the SPARK datasets used in the study are funded by the Simons Foundation, The Transmitter’s parent organization.) The data include genetic findings and parent-reported information on developmental milestones, cognitive and behavioral traits, co-occurring conditions and family history.

      The machine learning analysis grouped the autistic people into four subtypes based on their genetic signatures and clinical patterns.

      The “Social/behavioral” group—accounting for 37 percent of the sample and whose participants show repetitive behaviors, communication challenges and co-occurring conditions, but few developmental delays—has common genetic variants linked to ADHD and depression, and rare variants in genes active primarily after birth in certain brain cells. Another 19 percent belong to the “Mixed ASD with Developmental Delay” group, which hit many milestones later in development than children without autism but typically don’t have co-occurring conditions such as anxiety and depression; these participants carry many rare, damaging variants—both inherited and new—in genes active during early brain development in utero.

      [The real challenge now] ‘is unraveling the biology that stems from those genes.’ - Michael Lombardo

      Another group, called “Moderate challenges” (34 percent), is distinguished by a developmental pattern similar to the Social/behavioral group, though with less severity; its participants have rare genetic changes in less essential genes, which may explain their mild core autism traits. The 10 percent of children in the “Broadly affected” group, on the other hand, have prominent autism traits from an early age and carry a heavy load of rare mutations in key genes, including targets of a protein involved in fragile X syndrome.

      These genetic differences track with the ages at which children reached certain developmental milestones and their age at autism diagnosis. For example, the groups with variants in early-expressed genes—the Broadly affected and the Mixed ASD with Developmental Delay groups—showed delays in early developmental skills and earlier diagnoses, whereas the group with variants in genes expressed after birth—the Social/behavioral group—had later diagnoses and developmental timelines similar to those of non-autistic children.

      “There are a lot of kids who seem very neurotypical until a bit later in childhood,” says study investigator Natalie Sauerwald, associate research scientist of computational genomics at the Flatiron Institute. “The fact that we were able to find genetics that aligns with that was really surprising.”

      Other research efforts have identified autism subgroups, but none currently offer the definitive take on how to group populations within the autism spectrum—likely because results depend on who’s studied and how, Lombardo says. The new study included children aged 4-18, which increased the sample size but introduced variability, because a preschooler and a teenager are at different developmental stages, he says. His own work, focused on narrower age ranges, has found fewer subtypes, suggesting that different datasets may yield different subtypes.

      In addition, rather than linking genes to single traits as in past investigations, Troyanskaya and colleagues looked at a person’s overall combination of traits.

      The team validated their new findings using data from the Simons Simplex Collection (SSC), which contains information gathered by clinicians. The autism subtypes identified based on parent-reported data were consistent with those found in the SSC, which suggests that the subtypes reflect real differences, Troyanskaya says.

      As more data become available, the identified autism subtypes may be further refined, revealing additional genetic and clinical details within each group, she says.

      More data can validate the findings across diverse populations and adult cases, which could eventually lead to more tailored diagnoses and support in the future, Sauerwald says.

      Thomas Bourgeron, director of the Human Genetics and Cognitive Functions Unit at the Institut Pasteur in Paris, who was not involved in the work, agrees. “Some individuals need medical support, maybe gene therapy, and others need better inclusion in society, better recognition of neurodiversity and so on,” he says.

      However, he adds, a common limitation in autism research is that it focuses too much on clinical data and not enough on real-life experiences, so there’s a need for more practical, long-term information to better understand how autism affects daily life. “We need to have a better idea of the trajectory of these individuals.”

      Fig. 1: Overview of study design and description of identified subclasses.

      Decomposition of phenotypic heterogeneity in autism reveals underlying genetic programs | doi:10.53053/BZOX1294

      How YouTube and Adhesive Tape Are Disrupting Assistive Technology

      Mike's Notes

      Very cool. Making stuff.

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > IEEE Spectrum
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      24/03/2026

      How YouTube and Adhesive Tape Are Disrupting Assistive Technology

      By: Jason Hahr
      IEEE Spectrum: 31/01/2026

      Jason Hahr is a 2025 IEEE Spectrum Taenzer Fellow in disability rights and assistive technology journalism.

      The “MacGyver” approach lets disabled users reconfigure their tech

      One of maker Therese Willkomm's assistive tech hacks involved developing a control panel for GPS map apps—part of her mission to help disabled people find their way through a non-compliant tech world. Therese Willkomm

      Assistive technology is expensive, and many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes. Disabled assistive tech users also must contend with equipment that was often designed without any capacity to be repaired or modified. But assistive tech users ultimately need the functionality they need—a wheelchair that isn’t constantly needing to be charged, perhaps, or a hearing aid that doesn’t amplify all background noise equally. Assistive tech “makers,” who can hack and modify existing assistive tech, have always been in high demand.

      Therese Willkomm, emeritus professor of occupational therapy at the University of New Hampshire, has written three books cataloging her more than 2,000 assistive technology hacks. Willkomm says she aims to keep her assistive tech hacks costing less than five dollars.

      She’s come to be known internationally as the “MacGyver of Assistive Technology” and has presented more than 600 workshops and assistive tech maker days across 42 states and 14 countries.

      IEEE Spectrum sat down with Willkomm ahead of her latest assistive tech Maker Day workshop, on Saturday, 31 January, at the Assistive Technology Industry Association (ATIA) conference in Orlando, Florida. Over the course of the conversation, she discussed the evolution of assistive technology over 40 years, the urgent need for affordable communication devices, and why the DIY movement matters now more than ever.

      IEEE Spectrum: What got you started in assistive technology?

      Therese Willkomm: I grew up in Wisconsin, where my father had a machine shop and worked on dairy and hog farms. At age 10, I started building and making things. A cousin was in a farm accident and needed modifications to his tractor, which introduced me to welding. In college, I enrolled in vocational rehabilitation and learned about rehab engineering—assistive technology wasn’t coined until 1988 with the Technology-Related Assistance Act. In 1979, Gregg Vanderheiden came to the University of Wisconsin-Stout and demonstrated creative things with garage door openers and communication devices. I thought, “Wow, this would be an awesome career path—designing and fabricating devices and worksite adaptations for people with disabilities to go back to work and live independently.” I haven’t looked back.

      You’ve created over 2,000 assistive technology solutions. What’s your most memorable one?

      Willkomm: A device for castrating pigs with one hand. We figured out a way to design a device that fit on the end of the hog crate that was foot-operated to hold the hind legs of the pig back so the procedure could be done with one hand.

      Assistive Technology’s Changing Landscape

      How has assistive technology evolved over the decades?

      Willkomm: In the 1980s, we fabricated devices from wood and early electronics. I became a [Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America, a.k.a. RESNA] member in 1985. The 1988 Technology-Related Assistance Act was transformational—all 50 states finally got funding to support assistive technology and needs in rural areas. Back in the ‘80s, we were soldering and making battery interrupters and momentary switches for toys, radios, and music. Gregg was doing some things with communication. There were Prentke Romich communication devices. Those were some of the first electronic assistive technologies.

      The early 1990s was all about mobile rehab engineering. Senator Bob Dole gave me a $50,000 grant to fund my first mobile unit. That mobile unit had all my welding equipment, all my fabrication equipment, and I could drive farm to farm, set up outside right in front of the tractor, and fabricate whatever needed to be fabricated. Then, around 1997, there were cuts in the school systems. Mobile units became really expensive to operate. We started to look at more efficient ways of providing assistive technology services. With the Tech Act, we had demonstration sites where people would come and try out different devices. But people had to get in a car, drive to a center, get out, find parking, come into the building—a lot of time was being lost.

      In the 2000s, more challenges with decreased funding. I discovered that with a Honda Accord and those crates you get from Staples, you could have your whole mobile unit in the trunk of your car because of advances in materials. We could make battery interrupters and momentary switches without ever having to solder. We can make switches in 28 seconds, battery interrupters in 18 seconds. When COVID happened, we had to pivot—do more virtual, ship stuff out to people. We were able to serve more individuals during COVID than prior to COVID because nobody had to travel.

      How do you keep costs under five dollars?

      Willkomm: I aim for five dollars or less. I get tons of corrugated plastic donated for free, so we spend no money on that. Then there’s Scapa Tape—a very aggressive double-sided foam tape that costs five cents a foot. If you fabricate something and it doesn’t work out, and you have to reposition, you’re out a nickel’s worth of material. Buying Velcro in bulk helps too. Then Instamorph—it is non-toxic, biodegradable. You can reheat it, reform it, in five minutes or less up to six times. I’ve created about 132 different devices just using Instamorph. A lot of things I make out of Instamorph don’t necessarily work. I have a bucket, and I reuse that Instamorph. We can get six, seven devices out of reusable Instamorph. That’s how we keep it under five dollars.

      What key legislation impacts assistive technology?

      Willkomm: Definitely the Technology-Related Assistance Act. In the school system, however, it only says “Did you consider assistive technology?” So that legislation really needs to be beefed up. The third piece of legislation I worked on was the AgrAbility legislation to fund assistive technology consultations and technical assistance for farmers and ranchers. The latest Technology-Related Assistance Act was reauthorized in 2022. Not a whole lot of changes—it’s still assistive technology device demonstrations and loans, device reuse, training, technical assistance, information and awareness. The other thing is NIDILRR—National Institute on Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research, funded under [the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a.k.a. HHS]. Funding the rehab engineering centers was pretty significant in advancing the field because these were huge, multimillion-dollar centers dedicated to core areas like communication and employment. Now there’s a new one out on artificial intelligence.

      With over 2,000 hacks to improve usability of assistive technologies, veteran DIY maker Therese Willkomm has earned the moniker “the MacGyver of assistive tech.” Therese Willkomm

      A Vision for a Better Assistive Tech Future

      What deserves more focus in your field?

      Willkomm: The supply-and-demand problem. It all comes down to time and money. We have an elderly population that continues to grow, and a disability population that continues to grow—high demand, high need for assistive technology, yet the resources available to meet that need are limited. A few years back, the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation had a competition. I submitted a proposal similar to the Blue Apron approach. People don’t have supplies at their house. They can’t buy two inches of tape—they have to buy a whole roll. They can’t buy one foot of corrugated plastic—they’ve got to buy an 18-by-24 sheet or wait till it gets donated.

      With my third book, I created solutions with QR codes showing videos on how to make them. I used Christopher Reeve Foundation funding to purchase supplies. With Blue Apron, somebody wants to make dinner and a box arrives with a chicken breast, potato, vegetables, and recipe. I thought, what if we could apply that to assistive technology? Somebody needs something, there’s a solution out there, but they don’t have the money or the time—how can we quickly put it in a box and send it to them? People who attended my workshops didn’t have to spend money on materials or waste time at the store. They’d watch the video and assemble it.

      But then there were people who said, “I do not have even five minutes in the school day to stop what I’m doing to make something.” So we found volunteers who said, “Hey, I can make slant boards. I can make switches. I can adapt toys.” You have people who want to build stuff and people who need stuff. If you can deal with the time and money issue, anything’s possible to serve more people and provide more devices.

      What’s your biggest vision for the future?

      Willkomm: I’m very passionate about communication. December 15 was the passage in 1791 of our First Amendment, freedom of speech. Yet people with communication impairments are denied their basic right of freedom of speech because they don’t have an affordable communication device, or it takes too long to program or learn. I just wish we could get better at designing and fabricating affordable communication devices, so everybody is awarded their First Amendment right. It shouldn’t be something that’s nice to have—it’s something that’s needed to have. When you lose your leg, you’re fitted with a prosthetic device, and insurance covers that. Insurance should also cover communication devices and all the support services needed. With voice recognition and computer-generated voices, there are tremendous opportunities in assistive technology for communication impairments that need to be addressed.

      What should IEEE Spectrum readers take away from this conversation?

      Willkomm: There’s tremendous need for this skill set—working in conjunction with AI and material sciences and the field of assistive technology and rehab engineering. I’d like people to look at opportunities to volunteer their time and also to pursue careers in the field of specialized rehab engineering.

      How are DIY approaches evolving with new technologies?

      Willkomm: What we’re seeing at maker fairs is more people doing 3D printing, switch-access controls, and these five-minute approaches. There has to be a healthy balance between what we can do with or without electronics. If we need something programmed with electronics, absolutely—but is there a faster way?

      The other thing that’s interesting is skill development. You used to have to go to college for four, six, eight years. With YouTube, you can learn so much on the internet. You can develop skills in things you never thought were possible without a four-year degree. There’s basic electronic stuff you can absolutely learn without taking a course. I think we’re going to have more people out there doing hacks, asking “What if I change it this way?” We don’t need to have a switch.

      We need to look at the person’s body and how that body interacts with the electronic device interface so it requires minimal effort—whether it be eye control or motion control. Having devices that predict what you’re going to want next, that are constantly listening, knowing the way you talk. I love the fact that AI looks at all my emails and creates this whole thing like “Here’s how I’d respond.” I’m like, yeah, that’s exactly it. I just hit select, and I don’t have to type it all out. It speeds up communication. We’re living in exciting times right now.

      This article was supported by the IEEE Foundation and a John C. Taenzer fellowship grant.

      Why So Many Info Tips Are Bad (and How to Make Them Better)

      Mike's Notes

      Another excellent article from Kate Kaplan that I can use to configure the CMS Engine (cms).

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > The NN/g Newsletter
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      23/03/2026

      Why So Many Info Tips Are Bad (and How to Make Them Better)

      By: Kate Kaplan
      The NN/g Newsletter: 23/01/2026

      Kate Kaplan specializes in applying human-centered design and research practices to enterprise UX challenges. With over 15 years in UX, Kate has extensive experience in both conducting research and helping teams understand and apply user insights to overall business strategy.

      Summary:

      Information tips can clarify complex UIs, but they should not hide essential information, trigger redundant information, or disrupt the current workflow.

      Information tips — those helpful little messages triggered by tapping or hovering over a question mark (?) or info (i) icon — can help users make faster decisions and increase the understandability of UI elements. But in practice, they’re often overused, misapplied, or bloated with unnecessary content. When info tips hide essential instructions or bury users in redundant explanations, they create confusion rather than clarity.

      In This Article:

      • What Is an Info Tip?
      • Representing Info Tips in User Interfaces
      • The Problem with Info Tips
      • Pitfalls of Bad Info Tips
      • Pitfall #2: Hiding Critical, Task-Assistive Information
      • Pitfall #3: Interrupting the Task Flow

      What Is an Info Tip?

      An information (info) tip is a brief, contextual message designed to offer supplemental information about a specific interface element or step in a workflow.

      It’s typically activated by hovering over or clicking on a small icon — often a lowercase i or a question mark — and is attached to a specific element within the interface (e.g., a text field, icon, button, label).

      ✅ An example of a useful info tip from the Ease Employment Benefits Portal: Clicking on the ? icon reveals a concise explanation about why specific data is collected and how it’s used.

      Info tips can be revealed through two primary patterns:

      • Tooltips, which appear on mouse- or keyboard-hover gestures within desktop sites
      • Popup tips, which are similar to tooltips, but are triggered by clicking or tapping an element’s associated icon

      Both types serve the same core purpose: providing extra context to those who need additional clarification or guidance without overwhelming the interface with text.

      Representing Info Tips in User Interfaces

      The i Icon: General Information

      The encircled lowercase i icon is broadly understood to indicate optional, helpful information.

      In our icon-related research, participants interpreted the i icon primarily as representing an option for “more information” and expected it to reveal supplemental information such as:

      • Definitions
      • Additional details or brief explanations
      • Promotional terms

      This makes the i icon a good fit for general information or nice-to-know guidance, but not urgent or error-related content. It is a solid choice for representing info tips that support user understanding without interrupting flow.

      The ? Icon: Help and Support

      The encircled question-mark icon (?) is also used frequently to trigger info tips. In our research, it was more strongly associated with help and support than with general supplemental information.

      People expected this icon to lead to:

      • FAQs
      • Customer-support contact information
      • Help content or tutorials

      However, when placed directly next to a specific interface element (such as the form field label in the example above) the ? icon is also an effective trigger for contextual help about a specific element. The key is proximity: When the icon is close to what it refers to, users interpret the help as local and relevant, rather than global or generic.

      The Problem with Info Tips

      Unfortunately, info tips are often abused as band aids in the interface, used to:

      • Cram in explanations that should’ve been designed into the UI
      • Hide critical instructions in the name of a “clean” interface
      • Offload poor labeling or UX copywriting onto the user

      Info tips are not a catch-all solution for decluttering the interface by sweeping essential content into a hidden layer. Nor should they be used to bury large amounts of information that disrupt users’ flow when revealed — what we call the “jump scare” scenario, where a user expects a quick tip but gets an entire modal or screen takeover instead.

      But info tips aren’t inherently bad. When well-implemented, they offer concise, helpful, and contextual information that improves usability without cluttering the interface.

      Well-crafted info tips can:

      • Clarify jargon or technical terms
      • Explain why specific data is requested
      • Guide users to locate needed information
      • Reassure users about data usage

      However, a good rule of thumb is to assume that most users will never see the info tip. Those who do have extra motivation for seeking them out are confused, stuck, or need clarification or reassurance. That’s why info tips should deliver clear, in-the-moment guidance that directly supports the user's immediate task.

      Pitfalls of Bad Info Tips

      Info-tip misuse generally falls into three categories:

      • Wasting users’ time: Displaying obvious, redundant, or irrelevant information
      • Hiding critical information: Burying essential guidance or constraints most users will need upfront
      • Interrupting the task flow: Using intrusive patterns such as modals or overlays that take users away from the task at hand

      Pitfall #1: Wasting Users’ Time

      Every info-tip interaction — even just that one small click or hover — incurs a small but real interaction cost. Redundant or obvious tips waste users’ time and undermine trust.

      Don’t use info tips for:

      1. Marketing fluff
      2. Restating visible content or instructions
      3. Reexplaining the obvious

      Info-tip icons like the i or ? signal to users that something might be unclear or needs elaboration. When they instead reveal generic marketing fluff, users can feel misled and frustrated.

      ❌ Doodle.com: The info tip displays marketing information (The quickest way for two people to meet) to further sell the Schedule 1:1s feature.

      Info tips also waste time when they restate what’s already perfectly clear in the interface. These tips give the illusion that additional explanation exists, but deliver only repetition.

      ❌ State.gov: Clicking the i icon next to the City of Birth form field triggers the message: Enter the city of your birth. These tips simply repeat what's already on the screen, making users feel like there's more to learn when there isn’t.

      ❌ In this example, a ? icon next to Paper Type appears promising. Users might expect guidance on how to choose between options like Satin, Gloss, or Uncoated. Instead, it produces an obvious, unhelpful message: Choose your preferred paper type from the options below.

      Pitfall #2: Hiding Critical, Task-Assistive Information

      Info tips should not be used to bury essential instructions, constraints, or legal disclaimers. Doing so turns important guidance into a game of hide-and-seek and could even be a deceptive pattern in some cases.

      Avoid putting in info tips:

      • Constraints or rules
      • Form-field limitations (e.g., character limits)
      • Legal agreements or disclaimers
      • Complex instructions or explanations

      Complex instructions that help users make decisions should be visible, not hidden in a tip. People need to reference these explanations while completing tasks, not break their flow or current view to search for guidance.

      ❌ U.S. Find a Grave Index: These complex explanations for proceeding with a simple task are too overwhelming for an info tip. If a task truly requires this much upfront guidance, the information should be integrated directly into the interface, where it’s always visible and easy to reference.

      Instead of hiding complex instructions in an info tip, it’s more effective to display key information at the primary level of the interface. When users must weigh multiple options or make nuanced choices, surfacing that guidance upfront enables quick comparison without disrupting task flow.

      ✅ Microsoft Test and Learn: The design provides clear, inline explanations for the various output types (Result Grid, Trend Chart, and Category Impact) without requiring multiple clicks or hovers to reveal. This approach helps users compare outputs and quickly make an informed decision without having to hunt down hidden descriptions.

      Additionally, any constraints, rules, or limitations for inputs should be displayed on the primary level.

      ❌ USPS.com: The form field hides character constraints within an info tip. This information should be displayed on the primary level. If the form fails due to unseen constraints, users are left frustrated and rework is required.

      Pitfall #3: Interrupting the Task Flow

      People expect clicking an information icon to reveal brief, helpful messages that they can reference in the context of their current workflow — not modal windows or full-page takeovers of walls of text.

      Don’t surprise users with:

      • Overly complex, verbose content
      • Modals or overlays that block their task
      • New pages that take them away from the workflow

      When possible, ensure that info tips are displayed inline or adjacent to the relevant element. Obscuring the current step or view of the interface makes it harder for users to connect the guidance with the task at hand.

      ❌ CapitalOne mobile site: Clicking the i icon next to About payment options replaces the current view with several explanations of the different amount options. While the information is useful, the pattern disconnects users from the content they need to reference while comparing options.

      Modals and full-page overlays are jarring when used for info tips. Keeping the guidance adjacent to the element it supports allows users to maintain context and better understand the relevance of the information.

      ❌ GSA.gov (1 of 2): Users are likely to expect that clicking the i icon next to First & Last Day of Travel will reveal a brief definition of the term as defined in the travel policy.

      ❌ GSA.gov (2 of 2): Instead, clicking the icon triggers a darkened overlay that obscures the workflow and a surprising modal dialog at the top of the page.

      Even more disruptive is launching an entirely new page from what appears to be a simple info-tip icon. This approach not only obscures the context but also forces users to abandon their task.

      ❌ Nextdoor.com (1 of 2): The site displays a ? icon next to the Sign-in code field label. Users are likely to expect that clicking the icon will display a brief description of what a signin code is or where to find it.

      ❌ Nextdoor.com (2 of 2): Instead, clicking the ? icon next to the Sign-in code field launches a new page containing a full explanation of two-step verification. The information about where to find the signin code is buried within the verbose content.

      Conclusion: Use Info Tips Wisely

      Info tips can enhance clarity when they offer just-in-time, supplemental guidance within the context of the current workflow.

      Do:

      • Use info tips for supplemental content
      • Keep them short, contextual, and easy to dismiss
      • Represent them with familiar icons (i or ?)
      • Assume users who activate them need quick, in-the-moment guidance

      Don’t:

      • Hide essential or frequently needed information
      • Use info tips as a crutch for poor labeling or dense layouts
      • Trigger popups or overlays that hijack the user’s focus or flow

      When thoughtfully implemented, info tips reduce confusion and increase user confidence. But they should always serve the user’s goals, not the designer's desire to declutter at all costs.

      Open Payment Standard x402 Expands Capabilities in Major Upgrade

      Mike's Notes

      A need-to-know for handling payments in the future.

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > InfoQ
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      22/03/2026

      Open Payment Standard x402 Expands Capabilities in Major Upgrade

      By: Sergio De Simone
      InfoQ: 22/01/2026

      Sergio De Simone is a software engineer. Sergio has been working as a software engineer for over twenty five years across a range of different projects and companies, including such different work environments as Siemens, HP, and small startups. For the last 10+ years, his focus has been on development for mobile platforms and related technologies. He is currently working for BigML, Inc., where he leads iOS and macOS development.

      After six months of real-world usage, the open payment standard x402 has received a major update, extending the protocol beyond single-request, exact-amount payments. The release adds support for wallet-based identity, automatic API discovery, dynamic payment recipients, expanded multi-chain and fiat support via CAIP standards, and a fully modular SDK for custom networks and payment schemes.

      "V2 is a major upgrade that makes the protocol more universal, more flexible, and easier to extend across networks, transports, identity models, and payment types. The spec is cleaner, more modular, and aligned with modern standards including CAIP and IETF header conventions, enabling a single interface for onchain and offchain payments."

      x402 V2 offers a unified payment interface supporting stablecoins and tokens across multiple chains, including Base, Solana, and others, while maintaining compatibility with legacy payment rails such as ACH, SEPA, and card networks. It also introduces per-request routing to specific addresses, roles, or callback-based payout logic, enabling complex multi-step payment workflows.

      Another enhancement in x402 V2 is the clear separation between the protocol specification, its SDK implementation, and facilitators (responsible for verifying and settling the payment on-chain), which improves extensibility and enables a modular, plug-in–based architecture.

      The new standard also introduces wallet-based access, reusable sessions, and modular paywalls. Wallet support provides clients with greater flexibility, streamlining payment flows and reducing round-trip and latency for previously purchased items. Modular paywalls enable developers to integrate and extend new backend payment logic, fostering a more extensible ecosystem.

      Finally, x402 V2 improves the developer experience by simplifying configuration through its modular design, adding support for choosing multiple facilitators simultaneously, and minimizing the amount of glue code or boilerplate required.

      x402 is an open, web-native payment standard/protocol designed to make payments a first-class citizen of the internet. It enables micro-payments, pay-per-use, and machine-to-machine payments, allowing web apps, APIs, and autonomous agents (like AI bots) to pay for services directly over HTTP without traditional accounts, subscriptions, or complex payment flows. Within months, the protocol has processed over 100 million payment flows across APIs, web applications, and autonomous agents.

      The protocol leverages the rarely used HTTP status code 402 (Payment Required) to signal when payment is required and to include payment instructions in the response. By using x402, payments can be executed directly within the HTTP request–response flow, eliminating the need to redirect users to external payment pages or to rely on API keys and personal accounts.

      Cloudflare, as one of the original partners in the x402 Foundation alongside Coinbase, integrated support for the protocol into its developer tools and infrastructure. This includes both the Agents SDK, which allows developers to build agents capable of automatically making payments using x402, and MCP servers that expose x402-enabled tools and enable services to return 402 Payment Required responses and accept x402 payments from clients.

      At Age 25, Wikipedia Refuses to Evolve

      Mike's Notes

      A fascinating insight from a former board member of the Wikipedia Foundation.

      Resources

      References

      • Reference

      Repository

      • Home > Ajabbi Research > Library > Subscriptions > IEEE Spectrum
      • Home > Handbook > 

      Last Updated

      21/03/2026

      At Age 25, Wikipedia Refuses to Evolve

      By: Dariusz Jemielniak
      IEEE Spectrum: 30/01/2026

      Dariusz Jemielniak is vice president of the Polish Academy of Sciences, a full professor at Kozminski University in Warsaw, and a faculty associate at the Berkman Klein Centre for Internet and Society at Harvard University. He served for a decade on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and is the author of Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia (Stanford University Press).

      The digital commons champion faces a crisis of its own making

      Wikipedia once had protracted and open debates about new formats that could let it evolve—are those days past? Illustration: IEEE Spectrum. Source images: Nohat/Wikimedia; Getty Images

      Wikipedia celebrates its 25th anniversary this month as the internet’s most reliable knowledge source. Yet behind the celebrations, a troubling pattern has developed: The volunteer community that built this encyclopedia has lately rejected a key innovation designed to serve readers. The same institution founded on the principle of easy and open community collaboration could now be proving unmovable—trapped between the need to adapt and an institutional resistance to change.

      Wikipedia’s Digital Sclerosis

      Political economist Elinor Ostrom won the 2009 Nobel Prize in economics for studying the ways communities successfully manage shared resources—the “commons.” Wikipedia’s two founders (Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger) established the internet’s open-source encyclopedia 25 years ago on principles of the commons: Its volunteer editors create and enforce policies, resolve disputes, and shape the encyclopedia’s direction.

      But building around the commons contains a trade-off, Ostrom’s work found. Communities that make collective decisions tend to develop strong institutional identities. And those identities sometimes spawn reflexively conservative impulses.

      Giving users agency over Wikipedia’s rules, as I’ve discovered in some of my own studies of Wikipedia, can lead an institution away ultimately from the needs of those the institution serves.

      Wikipedia’s editors have built the largest collaborative knowledge project in human history. But the governance these editors exercise increasingly resists new generations of innovation.

      Paradoxically, Wikipedia’s revolutionarily collaborative structure once put it at the vanguard of innovation on the open internet. But now that same structure may be failing newer generations of readers.

      Does Wikipedia’s Format Belong to Readers or Editors?

      There’s a generational disconnect today at the heart of Wikipedia’s current struggles. The encyclopedia’s format remains wedded to the information-dense, text-heavy style of Encyclopedia Britannica—the very model Wikipedia was designed to replace.

      A Britannica replacement made sense in 2001. One-quarter of a century ago, the average internet user was older and accustomed to reading long-form content.

      However, teens and twentysomethings today are of a very different demographic and have markedly different media consumption habits compared to Wikipedia’s forebears. Gen Z and Gen Alpha readers are accustomed to TikTok, YouTube, and mobile-first visual media. Their impatience for Wikipedia’s impenetrable walls of text, as any parent of kids of this age knows, arguably threatens the future of the internet’s collaborative knowledge clearinghouse.

      The Wikimedia Foundation knows this, too. Research has shown that many readers today greatly value quick overviews of any article, before the reader considers whether to dive into the article’s full text.

      So last June, the Foundation launched a modest experiment they called “Simple Article Summaries.” The summaries consisted of AI-generated, simplified text at the top of complex articles. Summaries were clearly labeled as machine-generated and unverified, and they were available only to mobile users who opted in.

      Even after all these precautions, however, the volunteer editor community barely gave the experiment time to begin. Editors shut down Simple Article Summaries within a day of its launch.

      The response was fierce. Editors called the experiment a “ghastly idea” and warned of “immediate and irreversible harm” to Wikipedia’s credibility.

      Comments in the village pump (a community discussion page) ranged from blunt (“Yuck”) to alarmed, with contributors raising legitimate concerns about AI hallucinations and the erosion of editorial oversight.

      Revisiting Wikipedia’s Past Helps Reveal Its Future

      Last year’s Simple Summaries storm, and sudden silencing, should be considered in light of historical context. Consider three other flashpoints from Wikipedia’s past:

      In 2013, the Foundation launched VisualEditor—a “what you see is what you get” interface meant to make editing easier—as the default for all newcomers. However, the interface often crashed, broke articles, and was so slow that experienced editors fled. After protests erupted, a Wikipedia administrator overrode the Foundation’s rollout, returning VisualEditor to an opt-in feature.

      The following year brought Media Viewer, which changed how images were displayed. The community voted to disable it. Then, when an administrator implemented that consensus, a Foundation executive reversed the change and threatened to revoke the admin’s privileges. On the German Wikipedia, the Foundation deployed a new “superprotect” user right to prevent the community from turning off Media Viewer.

      Even proposals that technically won majority support met resistance. In 2011, the Foundation held a referendum on an image filter that would let readers voluntarily hide graphic content. Despite 56 percent support, the feature was shelved after the German Wikipedia community voted 86 percent against it.

      These three controversies from Wikipedia’s past reveal how genuine conversations can achieve—after disagreements and controversy—compromise and evolution of Wikipedia’s features and formats. Reflexive vetoes of new experiments, as the Simple Summaries spat highlighted last summer, is not genuine conversation.

      Supplementing Wikipedia’s Encyclopedia Britannica–style format with a small component that contains AI summaries is not a simple problem with a cut-and-dried answer, though neither were VisualEditor or Media Viewer.

      Why did 2025’s Wikipedia crisis result in immediate clampdown, whereas its internal crises from 2011–2014 found more community-based debates involving discussions and plebiscites? Is Wikipedia’s global readership today witnessing the first signs of a dangerous generation gap?

      Wikipedia Needs to Air Its Sustainability Crisis

      A still deeper crisis haunts the online encyclopedia: the sustainability of unpaid labor. Wikipedia was built by volunteers who found meaning in collective knowledge creation. That model worked brilliantly when a generation of internet enthusiasts had time, energy, and idealism to spare. But the volunteer base is aging. A 2010 study found the average Wikipedia contributor was in their mid-twenties; today, many of those same editors are now in their forties or fifties.

      Meanwhile, the tech industry has discovered how to extract billions in value from their work. AI companies train their large language models on Wikipedia’s corpus. The Wikimedia Foundation recently noted it remains one of the highest-quality datasets in the world for AI development. Research confirms that when developers try to omit Wikipedia from training data, their models produce answers that are less accurate, less diverse, and less verifiable.

      The irony is stark. AI systems deliver answers derived from Wikipedia without sending users back to the source. Google’s AI Overviews, ChatGPT, and countless other tools have learned from Wikipedia’s volunteer-created content—then present that knowledge in ways that break the virtuous cycle Wikipedia depends on. Fewer readers visit the encyclopedia directly. Fewer visitors become editors. Fewer users donate. The pipeline that sustained Wikipedia for a quarter century is breaking down.

      What Does Wikipedia’s Next 25 Years Look Like?

      The Simple Summaries situation arguably risks making the encyclopedia increasingly irrelevant to younger generations of readers. And they’ll be relying on Wikipedia’s information commons for the longest time frame of any cohort now editing or reading it.

      On the other hand, a larger mandate does, of course, remain at Wikipedia to serve as stewards of the information commons. And wrongly implementing Simple Summaries could fail this ambitious objective. Which would be terrible, too.

      All of which, frankly, are what open discussions and sometimes-messy referenda are all about: not just sudden shutdowns.

      Meanwhile, AI systems should credit Wikipedia when drawing on its content, maintaining the transparency that builds public trust. Companies profiting from Wikipedia’s corpus should pay for access through legitimate channels like Wikimedia Enterprise, rather than scraping servers or relying on data dumps that strain infrastructure without contributing to maintenance.

      Perhaps as the AI marketplace matures, there could be room for new large language models trained exclusively on trustworthy Wikimedia data—transparent, verifiable, and free from the pollution of synthetic AI-generated content. Perhaps, too, Creative Commons licenses need updating to account for AI-era realities.

      Perhaps Wikipedia itself needs new modalities for creating and sharing knowledge—ones that preserve editorial rigor while meeting audiences where they are.

      Wikipedia has survived edit wars, vandalism campaigns, and countless predictions of its demise. It has patiently outlived the skeptics who dismissed it as unreliable. It has proven that strangers can collaborate to build something remarkable.

      But Wikipedia cannot survive by refusing to change. Ostrom’s Nobel Prize–winning research reminds us that the communities that govern shared resources often grow conservative over time.

      For anyone who cares about the future of reliable information online, Wikipedia’s 25th anniversary is not just a celebration. It is an urgent warning about what happens when the institutions we depend on cannot adapt to the people they are meant to serve.