growingkittens

There will always be humans who take advantage of a system. Why do you, like the parent commenter, think that is in question here? No one here is espousing the extreme position you put in quotes.

This boils down to "I think you are wrong because you are not an authority figure."

There will always be humans who take advantage of a system, that is not in question.

Believing that "too many" autistic people are using it as an excuse - an entire category of people - is bigotry.

Again, psychiatry is in its infancy. Many professionals use outdated models or stereotypes in practice. Living as an autistic individual can make it easier to clock other autistic people, because it's rare to meet someone who functions or thinks the same way you do and sticks out like a sore thumb. For example, "thinking in pictures" is not a universal autistic trait, but it's a pretty well known one.

A system with one perspective is a system waiting to fail.

Autistic individuals have systemic changes in their mind and body which let them see life from a different perspective.

People with executive function disorder have issues with rapid thinking, focusing, and other things that can work in their favor often enough to be passed on.

I estimate that at least 1/8 of all people I have ever met are on the autism spectrum. Around 1/4 to 1/2 of all people I have ever met have some form of executive function disorder.

Psychiatry is in its infancy. To see autism as an "excuse not to deal with life" is just plain bigotry.

Writing a specification for a personal library app in the hopes I can get AppSheet + Gemini to make one for me. I'm working on library science in general, so it will hopefully implement ideas I have about book classification and entity catalogs.

I have found that many areas of human knowledge are massively disorganized. Everything is also siloed; knowledge that could easily apply to other domains is hidden by things like specialized terminology.

I think it is because science is systematic, or step-by-step, and not systemic - lacking a "whole system" point of view. Both perspectives are needed to understand a reality made of systems.

When I was a child, my mother told me that it was like I "wanted to be miserable."

I didn't want to be miserable - I was autistic, ADHD, and brain damaged, but undiagnosed on all counts.

Considering that psychiatry is in its infancy, your statements have a level of finality that isn't warranted at all.

"True CPTSD" doesn't exist as a diagnosis yet in the DSM. Referring to it that way is highly disingenuous.

I was recently diagnosed as "AuDHD". I noticed that doctors who don't understand anything outside of depression and anxiety were more likely to refer to autism as a "fad".

> I would expect that, for cultures who's members score below average on IQ tests from the US, an equivalent IQ test created within that culture would show average members of that culture scoring higher than average members of US culture.

A moment from the show "Good Times" in 1974. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DhbsDdMoHC0 at 1:25

Additional note. Since it is my own description and it sounds familiar to you, if you want to discuss it further my email is in my profile.

Many people fall into a trap of thinking "we catch the bad guys now, not like in the old days." I'm sure people were saying it in the 90s, 80s, 70s...every era of advancement involves experiencing technology before it is widely understood, which can feel very futuristic or magical. The underlying systems we depend on, like the court system, are still stuck in "the old days".

It is my own description, based on patterns I've seen over my lifetime.

I've talked about how intergenerational trauma has affected my family before, although I didn't mention it started in 1918 when my great great grandfather killed my great great grandmother in a murder suicide, leaving my great grandmother an orphan who would one day abuse my grandma. [1]

I think there are patterns to abuse regardless of the cause. Abuse is essentially addiction to control or anger (the seven deadly sins are all forms of addiction). The patterns I can see give me hope that it is entirely possible to stop the cycle.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40485608

Or a byproduct of sustained trauma being more prevalent in modern society. There was a large shift in the way children are raised in the past 100 years, from community to individuality. Entire generations of people whose childhoods prepared them for a world that did not exist by the time they were adults. There is no template for raising children in the new world, and no community to fall back on. Many react with anger and resentment, and raise their children accordingly. Abuse is way more prevalent than most people realize.

Technological comfort just disguises it all.

I know that traumatized human brains tend toward negativity. I don't believe it is a natural human condition, though. With trauma, the instincts you mentioned start applying to the wrong situations - trauma rewires the brain. "Minor" trauma, sustained trauma, traumatic events, can all contribute to this.

Framing can be more difficult, but one "trick" with a telephoto lens is to find a neat detail to focus on and adjust the frame around the neat detail.

Metacybernetics is the only obscure word on that list, and it refers to all of the first-order cybernetics, second-order cybernetics, etc.

You missed the opportunity to ask a simple question - what is metacybernetics? - and decided everything on that list was just as niche.

That happens in system dynamics a lot, actually - there are many independently developed theories in many different disciplines that do not intertwine historically at all. I have met multiple people who work with systems mathematically on a professional level who had no idea about these other things.

This article does not begin to cover systems thinking. Cybernetics and metacybernetics are noticably missing. Paul Cilliers' theory of complexity - unmentioned. Nothing about Stafford Beer and the viable system model. So on and so forth.

The things the author complains about seem to be "parts of systems thinking they aren't aware of". The field is still developing.

I remember the same thing. That doesn't mean they knew how to teach us to "learn how to learn". Neither does it mean that the underlying education system supported that goal.

Same goes for user-centered design. Trying to make something user-friendly is one thing, successfully doing it is another. Large organizations are especially poor at user-friendly design because the underlying structures which support that goal don't exist. Organizational science is still in its infancy.

I notice that many palettes tend to follow the "traditional" color wheel strictly, without defining pink as a separate color on the main wheel.

Exactly. I'm not able to memorize multiplication tables or even listen to math lectures - I can't hold more than one or two numbers in my head before they start disappearing. However, I am capable of learning and using math to an advanced level, at least temporarily.

How? The way I think of numbers is actually quite similar to what is currently known as "new math". It's not taught well because almost no teacher was raised with it (and thus lack the ability to think in new math "natively"), but it is based on something real.

They're anti-college because of general education classes, which get in the way of the making money part or seem useless to their specialty.

Einstein had a few things to say about this. [1]

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1952/10/05/archives/einstein-stresse...

I accidentally started using Pinterest to organize infographics on my phone, which led to resurfacing material on a daily basis.

The process of organization with the app on my phone is itself mindless enough that I can focus on the meaning of what I'm looking at.

That's the friction point in a lot of these PKM solutions - the process of using them is set up for Big Important Tasks. The process of using the interface interferes with the flow of thought.

Accelerated tracks would produce the top tier, which begin in elementary school - so it's a matter of how much your parents invested in your education before school. Any child can technically enter the accelerated track at any grade. The later they join, the more untaught expectations there are. The other students went over these things already in previous accelerated classes. There's no on-ramp.

In the normal track, you don't eventually take calculus in math, learn much about labwork in science, or even learn how to write a research paper until the last year of classes at 18. (Source: class of 2005, USA)

All of these decentralized social media concepts were/are too technically complicated for too long during the Twitter debacle. Even now, the top results for "how to use Mastodon" have jargon incompatible with mainstream usage.

I am a "noncoder" because of a number of reasons. My best friend is a "coder" and still starts instructions with "It's easy! Just open the terminal...".

Unfortunately, I do advanced knowledge work, and the tools I need technically often exist...if you're a coder.

Coding is not that accessible. The intermediary mental models and path to experience required to understand a coding task are not available to the average person.