Bionic Reading

[Acidham]

Bionic Reading is a new method facilitating the reading process by guiding the eyes through text with artificial fixation points. As a result, the reader is only focusing on the highlighted initial letters and lets the brain center complete the word. In a digital world dominated by shallow forms of reading, Bionic Reading aims to encourage a more in-depth reading and understanding of written content.

 

 

See Bionic Reading Webpage for more information

 

 

Requirements

1. Python 3

2. Requests library pip install requests

3. API Key: https://rapidapi.com/bionic-reading-bionic-reading-default/api/bionic-reading1/, please enter API Key in Workflow settings.

Usage

The Bionic Reading Workflow is implemented as an Universal Action and accessible via keyword bio

Universal Action

Mark an URL and enter Universal action → search for Bionic Reading in Universal Action

Keyword

Just type bio and enter the text

 

Download on GIT: https://github.com/Acidham/alfred-bionic-reading/releases

 

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Acidham

[bambalados]

Nice stuff! Very excited to test it out! Really liked how easy you made it for users to enter their API_keys!

 

Unfortunately I couldn't get it running. Has probably something to do with the python path on Mac. The debugger shows:

 

[15:26:40.642] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Processing complete
[15:26:40.646] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Passing output 'hello' to Run Script
[15:26:40.647] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Passing output 'hello' to Run Script
[15:26:40.802] ERROR: Bionic Reading[Run Script] Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "bionic.py", line 7, in <module>
    import requests
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'requests'
[15:26:40.804] Bionic Reading[Run Script] Processing complete
[15:26:40.805] Bionic Reading[Run Script] Passing output '' to Run Script

 

Already tried changing the python path at the very beginning of the bionic.py file, but can't seem to get your workflow working properly.

 

(requests-library has been installed via bot pip install requests and pip3 install requests)

 

would be great if anyone has a solution for this!

[bambalados]

Found the solution to gain access to importing requests:

 

for usr/bin/python, run in Terminal:

 

python -m pip install requests

 

for usr/bin/python3, run in Terminal:

 

python3 -m pip install requests

 

[Acidham]

Thx I will change documentation to ensure requests is installed for python3...Thank you!

[bambalados]

In can anyone is wondering how it'd look like, from https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-meets-japanese-emperor-start-visit-launch-regional-economic-plan-2022-05-23/:

 

[modusop]

@Acidham Thank you for this workflow - the concept sounds great. Unfortunately when I run

bio some text

I get a qlmanage window which looks like this ...

 

I wondered whether it might be down to me using Brave as my default browser, I changed that back to Chrome but got the same result. Any thoughts please?

[bambalados]

@modusop looks like my output prior to installing the requests library for python on your computer. have you tried the debugger in Alfred to find out where the problem is?

[afridho]

8 hours ago, modusop said:

@Acidham Thank you for this workflow - the concept sounds great. Unfortunately when I run

bio some text

I get a qlmanage window which looks like this ...

 

I wondered whether it might be down to me using Brave as my default browser, I changed that back to Chrome but got the same result. Any thoughts please?

 

change

python3 bionic.py $query

to

/usr/local/bin/python3 bionic.py $query

 

will fix your problem

[modusop]

Thanks @afridho - I'm using Homebrew so changing the command to 

/opt/homebrew/bin/python3 bionic.py $query

worked for me. Thanks for your help

[TomBenz]

@Acidham I use many of your workflow and they are great. Many thanks.

 

Is this Bionic workflow kept updated and active? Even for small text it is saying "upgrade required" -- pls consider extending the limit for API call or provide a version that works full for a month or so. Any user of this in the forum and feedback thereof?

[vitor]

3 hours ago, TomBenz said:

pls consider extending the limit for API call or provide a version that works full for a month or so.

 

That’s not how API keys work in general (i.e. not specific to this workflow). It’s not up to the developer to extend limits and you can’t provide something that works for a period of time. All of that is defined by the API’s provider.

A workflow (and any program) accessing an API is a vehicle to accessing a third-party service. It is that third-party that defines which information you can get and how often. You get the key that makes sense for you and use that.

Yes, technically a program can contain a key in it, but that would mean it would be shared by every user. Meaning that the more popular it is, the more likely it is to bump against the limits. You could try to use something once a month and still fail because all the other users consumed the quota. It’s simpler for the developer to have users get their own keys. That way each one is responsible for their own usage.

If we could, all of us would provide unlimited access without configuration to every service. The limitations are there as a necessity, not a choice.

[TomBenz]

49 minutes ago, vitor said:

 

That’s not how API keys work in general (i.e. not specific to this workflow). It’s not up to the developer to extend limits and you can’t provide something that works for a period of time. All of that is defined by the API’s provider.

A workflow (and any program) accessing an API is a vehicle to accessing a third-party service. It is that third-party that defines which information you can get and how often. You get the key that makes sense for you and use that.

Yes, technically a program can contain a key in it, but that would mean it would be shared by every user. Meaning that the more popular it is, the more likely it is to bump against the limits. You could try to use something once a month and still fail because all the other users consumed the quota. It’s simpler for the developer to have users get their own keys. That way each one is responsible for their own usage.

If we could, all of us would provide unlimited access without configuration to every service. The limitations are there as a necessity, not a choice.

 

thanks @vitor. No problem with payment but have to understand usefulness of it by putting limited amount or trial license. It will be great if any user can share their experience or feedback on use of Bionic reader.

 

I have paid for chatGPT+ and API. But when I am using PDF summarizer (from Chris Grieser) workflow (have added my API in it), no charges are getting deducted. Not sure on how exactly they are charging.

 

 

[vitor]

Just now, TomBenz said:

No problem with payment

 

The API link at the top says there’s a free version which allows for 500 requests per day.

 

2 minutes ago, TomBenz said:

But when I am using PDF summarizer (from Chris Grieser) workflow (have added my API in it), no charges are getting deducted.

 

That also says they give 500 messages and 5000 PDF pages per month for free.

[TomBenz]

24 minutes ago, vitor said:

 

The API link at the top says there’s a free version which allows for 500 requests per day.

 

 

That also says they give 500 messages and 5000 PDF pages per month for free.

thanks @vitor. My request are much below these limits for now but Bionic one failed after initial 2-3 success itself. I will wait for @Acidham or other users of this workflow to respond. 

[Acidham]

@TomBenz not sure what you are asking. I am using this workflow with my API key and it works. As @vitor mentioned, the API and key and usage is completely in your hand. The workflow acts as a proxy between the user and the API 

[Vero]

23 hours ago, TomBenz said:

Bionic one failed after initial 2-3 success itself.

 

@TomBenz Could you open the debugger and give more details of what's failing?

 

Here's how you can use the workflow debugger, which should give you more information on what is failing:

https://www.alfredapp.com/help/workflows/advanced/debugger/

 

If you share the results here, we can help establish if the issue relates to the workflow, the API, etc...

[TomBenz]

17 hours ago, Vero said:

 

@TomBenz Could you open the debugger and give more details of what's failing?

 

Here's how you can use the workflow debugger, which should give you more information on what is failing:

https://www.alfredapp.com/help/workflows/advanced/debugger/

 

If you share the results here, we can help establish if the issue relates to the workflow, the API, etc...

 

Thanks @Vero and @Acidham

 

Here is debug log:

[14:14:29.615] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Processing complete
[14:14:29.615] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Passing output 'text message' to Run Script
[14:14:29.616] Bionic Reading[Keyword] Passing output 'text message' to Run Script
[14:14:32.522] Bionic Reading[Run Script] Processing complete
[14:14:32.529] Bionic Reading[Run Script] Passing output '/tmp/bionic.html' to Run Script
[14:15:19.017] Bionic Reading[Universal Action] Processing complete

 

Seems to be working for small text. 

 

For larger one via PDF, I still get bionic.html file and similar debug log but the html itself says {"message":"Upgrade Required"}.

 

It seems workflow is fine but I need to take paid account for API access. I will test more and upgrade if the need be. I want to find and compare speed reading application and workflow associated with it....would welcome any advise and suggestions.