There’s bullying and there’s romantic trauma - a very normal thing for people with autism. There’s really nothing good in romantic trauma in an NT environment for an autistic person. Nothing good at all.

Also there’s some bullying and there’s a lot of bullying.

He might have simply been in a good school and called that bullying.

Anyway, there lived such a guy as M.I. Dragomirov, a Russian general, his approaches to warfare are a fossil, but his approaches to upbringing and healthy relationships in a military can be roughly summed up as “one who’s taught to fear a stick will fear enemy bayonet even more”. Being subject to bullying does not generally teach one bravery. I mean, there are probably very virtuous parents who’ll explain to their kid that always hitting back and even when the teachers and other kids are on the bully’s side. But a lot of parents will pretend there’s no bullying and tell their kid to ignore it, and that hitting back is wrong.

I would really like to not have been in that school, the skills I’ve learned there I feel I won’t ever need in any environment other than an actual warzone. But in that case an autistic person will function even worse than other people, skills or not.

I really hope it isn’t until power representation of autistic people in the society makes it unnecessary.

Otherwise not having a diagnosis (even self-diagnosed, but just existent) makes many NT’s think you should behave like them and they can try to force you to behave like them and it’s normal to expect you to behave like them.

Also I dunno if you realize that autism also refers to people really unable to function on their own.

I’m autistic and a morning person. Let’s not introduce unnecessary criteria.

Wasting all your effort on appearing still not “normal” instead of living some kind of sincere life is just very stupid.

There’s a kind of people who think they don’t need to know an industry to know where it’s heading and where the progress is.

Mobile computers being thinner and replacing buttons with touchscreens are from that kind of delusions.

Now built-in chatbots with voice recognition and synthesis are all the rage. If you remember that “elevator in Scotland” sketch.

Yes, and we also need that for personal computers.

I mean, monochrome easy on the eyes displays being all you need to normally use it. All the fancy stuff on a separate hires color display that may even not be there.

We will have proper computing in our age.

Returning proper controls for most things is just the first step.

Seems similar to some tanks.

I haven’t driven a tank.

That and buttons that are almost as flat as touchscreens.

I want my clickety-click Fallout and Star Wars rugged industrial feeling.

This always happens, with change you have things you don’t need and things you need, and things you consider and things you don’t consider, and things you had and things you will have. Of these there’s a combination of things you had, you need and you don’t consider. Which means you will not have them, while needing them and not considering them.

Correct good feedback is in that area.

I don’t know Don, I’m sure he’s a fine guy, but I’ve read about all these kinds of rules (EDIT: emerging) much earlier - as early as 1940s, with airplanes and cars and other machines in production and in front lines that people had to operate for long hours under strain and make as few mistakes as possible.

Even USSR, not the Rome of ergonomics, had GOSTs for average ratio of errors an operator makes on a certain machine, machines had to be inside those numbers in tests involving people, or they wouldn’t get adopted into wide usage.

Note how the criterion is defined. Not formalities like the shape of something or the layout conforming to some vague definition, but the results of an actual test on people. Of course, though, there were also a myriad GOSTs as to how the specific controls may look, a GOST for every detail one could use in a device.

Not answering your question, I would expect the main contributing factors to be the same as everywhere.

One man’s innovation is another man’s loss. This is why power distribution affects conditions for innovation - people with power always fight against innovation bringing them loss.

A libertarian society is better than a corporate society then, and a corporate society is better than an authoritarian society.

Then there’s the incentive for innovation - if it brings one power, then one will work for it, and if it doesn’t - less likely.

This is why a libertarian society is worse than a libertarian society minus some patent protection, but better than one where patents are strong and do not reflect inventiveness and are used to gatekeep markets.

This is also why China is more innovative than Russia - in China some efficiency in actually making things makes one more powerful, but in Russia power is purely a matter of capturing it.

Political parties calling for deregulation usually in fact call for token deregulation in some areas and more regulation where their corporate sponsors need it.

Deregulation in patent and IP law is a good thing. The thing is - it’s not the same as most other laws, it’s the fight over definition of property on an enormous amount of value. It was treated without sufficient attention, so now it’s pretty bad.

I think any real change in that would require something similar to a revolution. Everywhere, especially in countries home to corporations built on such legal framework.

There’s the unsolvable problem - to prevent companies doing stupid things.

And there’s the solvable problem - have enough competition so that companies doing stupid things would become or remain small.

Which is why all the stupidity in computer industry in our days is a result of patent laws and protectionism.

I think Sun made mice that didn’t work without their metallic mouse pad, that had some sort of grid on it.

Apple’s problem is in following:

There are industrial designers, fashion designers, managers and engineers.

Apple doesn’t have industrial designers. Only fashion designers pretending.

In a normal company managers consult designers and engineers back and forth, both figuring out some compromise and also asking the other group whether there is a better way.

Not in Apple. Their designers are clearly superior hierarchically to engineers.

And in the end their products are of inferior quality (for that price).

Apple’s idea of how things should look and work, when expressed in words, is absolutely fine! It’s actually wonderful. And perfectly possible, it’s actually the same goal as with industrial ergonomics.

Except they don’t have the process they need to fulfill that. They only have the PR to pretend.

It is convenient when you don’t hit that button accidentally, only by lifting the thing up.

Seems consistent with the Apple justification of “ape users shouldn’t be physically able to do something stupid, then they won’t blame the computer”.

I don’t think I’ve heard anything responsible and sensible from politicians with chances to succeed in a two party system.

Anything involving a ministry in Russia is not a serious plan. They’ll receive funding, hire a couple of bash script writers, well, maybe a couple of people who’ll write drivers for Elbrus, Baikal or something that’s sort of developed and produced in Russia, but nobody really uses it even in governmental structures.

You have seen Idiocracy, yes? About selective reproduction.

I’ve seen the kind of people that reproduce well. Most of them are both immoral and not very smart.

My cousins’ parents are a good exception, though. They are exactly the kind of people that should have children, and their daughters too. My parents, on the contrary, were the kind of people about whom I’d never say that. It’s a pure miracle I’ve turned out at least kinda similar to a human.

On the contrary, the best people I know personally of my generation either have problems they haven’t yet solved or are gay.

OK, then thinking about myself, I actually think I’d not be that bad of a parent, in case one of those strange creatures likes me enough, but it would be really hard.

Antibiotics shouldn’t be used as easily as people think, though. Because, ahem, antibiotic resistance is a thing.

It’s a responsible position to only use antibiotics when you really need it. Not when you have cold. EDIT: just in case, by cold I mean cold, not covid

While how we should view it is shown in “Idiocracy”, Azimov’s “Foundation”, 20-17 BBY era of Star Wars EU. And in fuckload of other fiction showing use of too complex blackbox interconnected technology as Troyan horse by some enemy. And, of course, if some people here have read real science fiction, then in Lem’s books and stories.

OK. I just meant that one can demand that as a sign of respect or something. With a sufficient degree of narcissism.