In the introduction to Lord of The Rings Tolkein notes that he intended the work to be pure fantasy. The books not are not to be read as (strictly) allegorical. Also there is never any mention of The Silmarillion in any of these types of articles. Curious.
Sorry my thoughts seem to have offended you into a defensive position. That was not my intent. I'm sure that's why you attack someone's understanding. Saying there are gaps in logic, isn't accusatory or demeaning.
> None of it, I would guess.
You guess? Are you the author?
> AI is radical
Is it? Or is it a logical unfolding that has been predicted and theorized for the better part of a century?
Perhaps aspects of its implementation are radical?
> It is literally free
So are disposable razor blades when you buy the handle. Who has the most to benefit from some companies' AI products being free? I bet it's not the end-user.
> Some people don't know what a metaphor
Is that passive aggression? If so, how thoughtful. Some people are autistic.
All I'm saying is: Show me how much AI has actually changed and for whom. Then we can start this conversation. I was in fact, challenging the use of the plow as a metaphor.
AI seems very much a top down kind of tool, where a plow is bottom up.
Just curious here, how much of this was written by AI?
It seems to me to me to gloss over hundreds if not (tens of) thousands of years of human ingenuity.
Subtract AI, most people will probably be fine. Take away the plow and people will starve and die. AI is a luxury product and should be treated as such.
I would go so far as to say that AI "copilots" and "assistants" should not be allowed to refer to themselves in the first person. Can a plow refer to itself in the first person? Should a plow say, "Woah dude, we just hit a big rock"?
How many technologies came before the plow? How many people does it take to make a plow? How many people does a plow feed? How many technologies is AI contingent upon? A plow is a simple tool that has far more impact than AI has shown. It addresses a basic human need. AI, does not.
There are so many logic gaps in this argument. I don't want to go on.
Baking and eating bread dates back way farther than the bible. Leavened bread arose (pun intended) around the same time as agriculture. Many communities had a central hearth and would bake large loaves of bread.
It is easy to imagine that the bible and Christianity most likely tapped into an existing metaphor.
One of my family members told me a story of how their teachers let them play with pieces of asbestos on their school desks lauding it as the material of the future.
I recommend the novel Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson.
Mars makes Antarctica look like a jungle.
"The Red Mars series initiated a shift in science fiction away from the stars and back to our real future in the solar system. Unless a technological miracle occurs, we are not building an interstellar civilization anytime soon..."
I did enjoy reading this article. It is good to see some interesting facets of autism. I laud the researchers for caring and working to create new resources and understanding. However, this article may miss the mark so to speak.
- "...demonstrating the reasoning style in autism is sensitive to context..."
That's kind of the crux of it. Those of us with ASD, generally speaking, never get the context. Context is very often conveyed with nonverbal cues.
- "Within the general population, males typically report higher levels of autistic traits than females..."
This has proven to be problematic due to differences in healthcare availability and masking across many different groups of people. This type of thought propegates images such as the socially awkward smart white male nerd we've seen over and over. This may then cloud diagnosis for those who are not white or male. Cohen, often cited in the paper, has also stated that ASD correlates to an "extreme male brain" which raises many questions.
- "We hypothesised that if intuitive processing was impaired in autism..."
Some folks would argue that they're not impaired - or that their impairment largely stems from the inability of allistics (neurotypicals) to understand autistics. Hence the double empathy problem.
- The sample size for the study was pretty low. About 200 people. The gender split was pretty good, but there was no indication of individuals' backgrounds and locations. The individuals were all about 17 years old and were attending summer school. This is important: the students have already proven they can make it that far in schooling. They are probably considered "high functioning" making them a subset of the autism spectrum.
- "Environments that highlight the explicit nature of what to expect within that context, and that provide suitable time to meet any expectations, would facilitate deliberative processing and be beneficial for autistic individuals."
Uhm... yeah... we kind of already knew that. This kind of approach kind of limits any aid to one type. Individuals may benefit from noise reduction, light reduction, stimming comfortably, more privacy, more autonomy and many more environmental accommodations that might come along with the "needs more time" option.
- "Future research can explore whether individuals on the autism spectrum produce logically accurate responses more rapidly and effortlessly than non-autistic individuals."
Oh? Go on? And why might you be interested in that? Perhaps it's a pepetuation of the autistic superpower myth.
- "Testing was done in group sessions in this study which was not amenable to timing data, so timing to index about intuitive versus deliberative processing was not suitable."
I may not understand what "to index" means. But, it seems to me for research about individuals with autism benefitting from additional time or the lack of time constraints that this is important data. Heck, during a neuropsychological evaluation for ASD many of the exams are time-based!
- "Another limitation is that all the participants were relatively academically able as they were considering going to university..."
There it is.
- "This study highlights for the first time that intuitive and deliberative processing in autism is malleable based on time constraints, comparable to the malleability demonstrated by the control group."
Take time for yourself as often as you can. Find a hobby if you have time. Gardening, model building, reading books, painting or manual things that require some skill and learning that are NOT programming. Treat yourself to good meals.
Set goals outside of work. Like I want to visit "10 new cities".
Socialize face to face, if you have that inclination, talk to people about anything except programming.