No, the problem is greedy corporations.

There is an active need for many developers, think of every time you’ve used terrible software, every time a program crashed or you found yourself manually doing something and thought “there should be a tool for this”, every bad search and broken social media site.

Hell, we’re supposed to be in the middle of an “AI boom” and someone has to actually implement all those pie in the sky “automate away everyone’s jobs”. While AI can, debatably, write the code for that, it still takes a person to design, architect, implement, test and validate those systems.

No. The entire technical foundation on which “computer science” is built is crumbling due to lack of maintenance and funding and desperately needs people to fix it, however corporations are doing their what they do best; devaluing, destroying, and parasitizing their surroundings.

You started with adding three opposing definitions of blindness and then did the arguably worst thing of creating a single “blindness spectrum” that you call “vision”.

What you wrote isn’t adding to my message, it’s in direct opposition in a lot of ways and shows that you didn’t stop to understand what was being said before “adding” to it.

I think we do agree with the “everything is a spectrum” part, but my whole point could maybe be best summarized as “reality is a spectrum, classifications and language are not”

So I guess we’re fighting now. Meet me at the Brooks river at the end of the month, it’s a fish slapping contest, you’ll recognize me as #901 here

I would encourage you to re-read because I did cover exactly what you’re mentioning here and it seems like you might have stopped reading after the second paragraph.

the “healthy” variant

This is what was meant by the “mythical neurotypical”

Yes and no.

Using blindness as a simplified example, “blind” describes a person with visual accuity of less than 20/500 and/or a visual field less than 10°. The term “blind” describes a binary classification for individuals according to where they fall within those 2 different spectrums.

By definition there is no such thing as more blind or less blind, a person is either blind or not. This is true for the lesser “visually impaired” classification as well, however the flaws of this sort of classification are more apparent there as the treatments for low visual accuity and low visual field are vastly different and so acknowledging and understanding those spectrums are critical for treatment.

However, in acknowledging those spectrums it allows for the phrase “person A is more blind than person B” and it makes perfect sense because for both those spectrums lower scores are directly related to that “blind” classifier and higher scores to “sighted”. So it works perfectly well to describe the relationship between two individuals on those spectrums even if neither is definitionally blind.

This gets extra confusing when it’s unclear which spectrum axis is being compared.

Every human is blind compared to a spy satellite. ~according to visual accuity~

Every spy satellite is blind compared to the average human. ~according to visual field~

Often the way around this is to take those 2 spectrums and combine them into one score to create a “blindness spectrum”. Depending on how one reduces the 2 dimensions down to a single 1 dramatically changes how “impaired” one individual is compared to another, re-introduces the issues faced with the binary classification and additionally can result in many who meet the technical definition above having the same “blindness score” as a sighted person.

In many ways this is worse than the binary classifier because it introduced addition biases, errors and distortions between the root symptoms, in this case visual accuity and field, which prevents actually understanding and helping an individual.

These issues get significantly magnified when one is taking about a disorder like autism which is defined as an individual with “differences or difficulties in social communication and interaction, a need or strong preference for predictability and routine, sensory processing differences, focused interests, and repetitive behaviors.” With each item consisting of multiple different measurements and criteria each defining their own spectrum. It’s no longer just describing an axis direction within a 2d space with fairly precise, impartial measurements, but a very specific cluster of individuals within a 6+ dimensional space using highly subjective measurements.

This imprecise and high dimensional space is the actual “autistic spectrum” and yes everyone is somewhere on this spectrum. “Autistic” is just the name of what appears to be a very specific cluster of individuals, however when dealing with high dimensional spaces what counts as a cluster starts to get real weird and illusions start popping up everywhere, like the mythical neurotypical.

Wait until you hear the true story of the Irish Potato Famine and realize that not only did nobody learn from it, but most of the anglosphere seems to be towards a direct repeat of it at an even wider scale.

deleted by creator

Personally been a fan of shoggoth with a smiley face mask

I’d love to talk to someone in the middle of the computer science and developmental psychology Venn diagram.

Not that person, but an Interesting lecture on that topic

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

“killed by Israeli fire” is quite the choice of phrase.

That “short time” and odd date range (January to April) should both be red flags to be highly suspicious of them taking credit for external factors and cherry picking data/date ranges.

My analysis was based on taking them at face value as being the sole reason for the change, with the knowledge that the numbers they are reporting are highly deceptive. Even from that naive perspective their numbers are bad.

However, the data shows a sharp increase in the murder rate starting around 2014 due to unknown causes. The dropoff from 2010-2014 is often attributed to the defeat of the CIA backed Shower Posse gang after the Tivoli incursion in 2010.

I would bet that the current high murder rate is due, in part, to IMF loans (starting in 2013), global transition away from sugarcane to beets (predominantly EU in 2015), CIA involvement and COVID tourism impacts dramatically destabilizing the local economy. That’s something that no amount of killing by the government sanctioned cartel will have any positive impact on.

2024 homicide rate was ~40.1 per 100,000. Jamaica population is ~2.8 million so ~1100 murders/year. 37% decrease in homicides is ~420/year. Increase in police killings is 67.

Assuming you can attribute the change totally to whatever the police are doing (almost certainly not the reality) that puts the situation as a 1:6 trolley problem.

Is it an improvement? Technically yes, but imagine anything else working that way and it should be pretty obvious the JFJ is right that this is insane.