I'd like to encourage you to resist the "what I did wrong" framing, because it's definitely not a given that you did anything wrong in any given circumstance. Sometimes neurotypical people are just completely unreasonable, and sometimes they will try to manipulate you (and each other).
The strange part to me is that neurodivergence is commonly explained in terms of inability to see things from another point of view (see the classical "what will X person say is in the box?" test). But supposedly neurotypical people demonstrate what seems to me like a stunning lack of empathy (or more generally, ability to comprehend other worldviews) all the time. Especially when politics is involved.
Politics is about power fights: whose argument will convince the mass that in this case violence (laws -> state authority) is appropriate or not appropriate.
So even if the other person is able to comprehend other worldviews (which I would claim is actually often, though not always, the case), there exist very strong incentives to ignore these other world views in your actions when politics is involved.
IME religion facilities this phenomenon. In-group members (esp men) get forgiveness and freedom from consequences (perhaps conditioned on saying magic words). Whilst out-groups get "forgiveness" with extra consequences.
As far as the framing, it's helped me realize that actually, hey, sometimes it is their fault and they are being unreasonable and I actually didn't do anything wrong, they just don't like me. I mean yeah, that's also a thing.
Plus your questions will contain your mistakes, and what you take from any answers would reinforce your misunderstandings rather than correct them.
It's hard to suggest better learning means via the HN medium.
I learnt a lot when I carefully gave attention to a friend I deeply trusted, training my intuition based on their interactions, plus they trusted me enough to sometimes attempt to explain their intuitive reactions.
Rationally analysing human interactions via writing and psychology will screw up your leaning.
Children just learn by doing and are only guided in a gross sense.
If you want to understand people, one must learn like a child does.
These my personal beliefs that I apply to myself. Trying to find you some scientific papers would be counterproductive and destroy the point I am making.
Then there are those of us for whom social situations are a 3-billion-line case/esac statement.
case situation in
shesmiledandlaughedafterthejoke)
shelikedthejoke()
;;
shesmiledandlaughedafterthejokebutlookedsideways)
shesboredanddidntlikethejoke()
;;
thejokewasfunnyoncesoitmustbefunnyeverytimeeven200times)
crashandburn()
;;
etc)
;;
esac
Somehow, I managed to get married. My wife helped me understand what I was missing - it was like gaining eyesight after never having it or even understanding eyesight was a thing people had.
Yes, many people lack empathy. That is no excuse for you (or me!) to learn and use empathy.
Grok: https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNQ_26f4c367-77ed-4b6e-be55-83...
Claude: https://claude.ai/share/dca96b18-d583-4e14-b805-725d2e060761
Interestingly ChatGPT won't let me share a chat link for the same input text due to not passing a moderation filter, but you can plug that same gauche prompt into chat.com for yourself. Couldn't find the share button in Gemini.
Especially on topics for which there is little data or few sources.
Ask it a really specialized question - the kind of domain-specialized topic not openly and extensively published. Something post-doctoral research equivalent.
It will happily invent all the details. Then if you ask to confirm if those things actually exist, it will apologize and say they do not.
To be blunt, LLMs only seem intelligent because they were trained on moderate intelligence publications and people mainly ask low intelligence questions.
Fuck people.
I grew up at a time when a home appliance was an acceptable gift for the woman in charge.
I heard women complaining progressively more through time, and now it is not an acceptable gift.
This is also how I grew up (my parents were a little bit more on the conservative side). This together with the fact that I am not deeply knowledgable in the US-American common practices also made it hard for me to understand why the mother was angry about this gift, in particular considering that she did complain about the old one.
But when I mentioned it over coffee at work most of my female colleagues were aghast. I defended myself saying something like "It's the 21st century, we are way past the point that I can't gift a pan to my wife" and they said "Well that might be at YOUR home!", and I learned a thing.
Not everyone will care, but this is a stereotypical type of present likely to trigger anger and resentment in the recipient for a reason.
There’s whole genres of cleanup games on steam which are extremely popular, profitable, and well reviewed.
One of my favorite vectrex games is a Pac-Man clone where you play as a vacuum.
If I never wash my actual driveway, the same is not true. Therefore I will need to wash it at times when it's unpleasant or I don't want to, and it will take longer than powerwashing a driveway in Powerwash simulator.
Perhaps more importantly, it’s not his full time job.
My wife and I, by the way, are giving each other a joint New Year gift of a fancy robot vacuum cleaner: it's the best sort of gift, useful, elegant, and something that one would be reluctant to spend the money on otherwise.
The reaction is a result of the gift implying that the work is the responsibility of the individual recipient.
It's not a universal reaction, but common enough that it is a frequent trope in movies and TV.
You are worthy of being loved even if people close to you aren't able to express it to you.