octoperson @ octoperson @sh.itjust.works

Posts

25

Comments

414

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

I'm often reminded of a SpaceX render they put up on the 'Tube back when they were still working out the reusability thing. Commenters had a lot of questions about how the particular flight plan impacted on their fuel budget. And so, Elon himself waded in with the answers. Except he was talking about the dollar price it cost to buy the fuel. He was like 'why are you worried about fuel, it's not that expensive, guys' because he didn't understand the questions. He didn't understand why the amount of fuel and the mass of the fuel would be significant to anybody. Guys, I think he doesn't understand the rocket equation. He doesn't understand the central problem of rocketry. I think the guy might be full of it.

May be a special interest? I don't know if there's a clear cut distinction, or where it would be, or if it's even useful to make one.

Okay, if I was going to learn about fish, it might go something like "I mentioned to someone about how spawning salmon return to their place of birth. But is that actually true?" *Learns about salmon life-cycle. *Learns about biological study of animal migration. *Learns about migration in different animals. *Learns about how understanding has developed over time. *Learns how it influenced ideas on geoscience, commerce, anthropology

It's like I'm on a random walk through the tree of knowledge, rather than cataloguing a few select branches.

I do like how the class of lobe-finned fish can be interpreted to include human beings. That just tickles me.

Once again, it depends what they mean. What do they mean by 'collect information' and what do they mean by 'categories of things'. Because I like learning about things, I like going on research dives and learning odd bits of information. But I don't think I approach it in such a systematic way that this question suggests.

I checked against an extended version of the same test (AQ-50), and this question had some added clarification;

(e.g. types of car, types of bird, types of train, types of plant, etc.).

I could be interested in learning about any of those, but it would not be motivated by its belonging to the category. It would be if the particular car, bird, etc had some inherent interest, or was relevant to something else I was involved with

I think I Slightly Disagree

I don't know, but I want to make sure @DivergentHarmonics@sopuli.xyz sees this, as I think they would be interested, and may have some suggestions.

Dunno. They're probably all on X these days.

Can't find any evidence of that being a term prior to the tweet. I'd guess one of

• they meant something simple like 'hateful dialogue' or 'hateful diatribe', and thought it was a smart person way of saying it.
• it's the dog whistle du jour. Somewhere on stormfront or voat they're getting terribly worked up about 'dialectical hatred' as the new current threat to the white race.
• it's used in some niche context where it has meaning. But our tweeter thinks it's got more reach than it actually does.

So, I don't know if you're criticising me, or just making an observation (either is fine). But here's my reasoning for starting these posts, copied from the first post in the series.

I thought it could be fun/interesting to go through an autism test question by question, and see what resonates with people, and how we approach thinking about the questions.

I chose this particular test because it's a shortened version of one I was set by my own health provider, and at only ten questions it won't outstay it's welcome. And I chose to link to that particular website because they also include a discussion of the test's strengths and weaknesses, and also I didn't see them promoting any outdated ideas about autism (tho I didn't check thoroughly). If you want to suggest any alternates, I'd be open to hear.

And if these posts really bother you, we're on question 8 of 10 so it's nearly done. I'll take any feedback on board before I do another.

You're right, it does a bit. I should have worked out referral codes or something 😆

Not very quickly, no. If the task needed working memory (keeping count or something), that will be gone. I'll need to take a moment to reassess what I was doing and where I'm up to. If there were X,Y,Z subtasks, I'll need to check which ones are done and which not. A long enough interruption and I might forget entirely and not return to the task at all. If someone interrupts me by trying to help, and I don't immediately understand what they're trying to do, I find that very irritating.

Disagree. I'm leaning towards Definitely Disagree but it's not a definite definitely haha.

And also

I don't even work that hard

Trump would never compare himself unfavourably to anything, even in jest.

Feel old yet? This is him now

You could rewrite your greatest hits and republish somewhere you don't mind showing them. Take the approach of a student just changing enough so they're unlikely to get caught plagiarising their sources.

I had that thought too. But I remember reading about cave paintings where prehistoric people had painted their hands, and the distribution of lefts and rights was consistent with there being the same proportion of lefties as in modern times. And I doubt the social pressures around handedness go back that far.

Ohoh my own updated response is very dismissive of those emotional intelligence tests, and the notion that normal people can read your mind through your face. I very much enjoyed Ponderful's (very long) video on the subject, and you might too.

But then they don't use PhD's preferred pronouns to refer to PhD in the tweet 😔

C

The proposal [prohibits] the use, sale, import and export of food and feed "from cell cultures or tissue derived from vertebrate animals".

Am I missing something, is it a translation issue, or did they just ban meat?

I prefer to parse it as a series of exclamations. China! Ferrari! Sex! Orgy! Death! Crash!

Haha. I have opinions on this one. I think I'll wait a bit before discussing it so as not to bias anyone else's response.

(Later)

Look at all those emotions! Can you name them all? These pictures are used in emotional intelligence tests where they'll ask you to do exactly that - name them all.

What they won't ask you is, how is the photoshoot going for this guy? Is it his normal line of work and how does this particular job compare to a regular day? Are any of the faces difficult for him to make? Is he trying to method act them, does he have some rehearsed, does he have his own reference pictures to look at? Does he have a rapport with the photographer? Is the lighting bothering him? Is he tired? Does the shoot have catering? What's he planning on doing later?

They don't ask any of that because, obviously, you can't tell what someone is thinking or feeling just by looking at their face.

Now, if you could see the context, if you knew something about the guy, could see how he was acting and what he was saying, then you could make a guess at some of this information. Maybe even a good guess. But just from the face alone? No chance!

Here is what emotional intelligence practitioners don't want you to know about faces;

Facial expressions are live action emoji, that you act out with your face to communicate the idea of an emotion. They are not windows into the soul.

This question is garbage. Definitely Disagree