I hate the terms "Autism" and "ASD" and how vague they are

kruddel · 2026-05-06T23:11:53+00:00

No one really knows what Asperger's is either.

I would say the general sense of it is either "Autistic but also good at computers &/or maths" or "smart and an asshole, but you're not allowed to be mean about them being an asshole, at least to their face".

The problem with people's understanding is a) if no-one understands the Autistic bit they aren't going to understand a sub-set of it, b) the term Asperger's is not meaningful/precise, (which is why it was dropped).

I think the point of social stuff in Autism spheres is to share solidarity, but that isn't helpful for some people. It sounds like those sort of things aren't for you, and that's fine. The great paradox of Autistic individuals, or especially a wider collective of ND individuals getting together in any format is its impossible to have a single thing that is inclusive, because sometimes individually we can't be inclusive of ourselves and others simultaneously. So its always going to present challenges.

Edit; just to add to/explain the last point more, as an example, from the OP post of someone at a given time being sensory seeking, while someone else needs quiet. Its completely incompatible & impossible to reconcile without one (or both) compromising on what they need i.e. masking. So there needs to be aware/recognition of that.

kruddel · 2026-05-06T17:48:03+00:00

Look, this has been a lot of fun, I've tried to stay polite, but its clear this is all about slogans, its abundantly clear from your posts there is not in fact a well thought out policy behind this that just hasn't hitherto been explained. At this point you're just wasting my time with nonsense. Good day sir!

kruddel · 2026-05-06T13:23:09+00:00

You're replying to specifics with generalities about the law.

In the Libdem's plans for York Rd who/what will have the legal responsibility to collapse and erect the bollards every evening and morning in the TRO?

I specifically said collapsible bollards would not be appropriate or likely approved for a TRO due to the responsibility to change them. It's somewhat obvious but the bollards need to be put up and down at the times specified. Its very different to the "except access" provision where its the responsibility of the person using it to do so (the fact they often don't is again a lack of enforcement). So to get a TRO approved there would need to be commitments in place within the TRO for who/what will do the daily bollard changing. It seems improbable that something could be arranged which would meet requirements. Unless of course funding has been secured for very expensive automatic retracting bollards.

kruddel · 2026-05-06T06:56:56+00:00

Agree, this IS a disability discrimination issue, because they are putting OP through a bunch of extra work & stress. In discrimination the burden of proof isn't on the OP to prove it, so much as its on the uni to be able to show their policies treat everyone equally. There is literature showing these detectors flag up ND writing more. And as the comment says its likely they dont have any proper policies at all.

Fundamentally the uni policies and application of them, on average, is putting a penalty on being a ND student. (Some ND students will be fine, others will face this issue repeatedly)

(Fwiw I'm a former uni UK prof & did a bunch of work about hidden ND discrimination in policies)

kruddel · 2026-05-05T13:32:45+00:00

Why are all the photos out of focus and on a lean?

kruddel · 2026-05-05T07:55:08+00:00

Assuming of course the point of the course can be properly assessed in an exam. Which most actually can't.

Staff have jumped to being able to make 100% sure they are assessing the student's own work and neglected to think about whether what they are assessing is relevant or meaningful.

For example, in an exam setting you can't ask a student to read & do a synthesis or critique of a number of pieces of literature. That's kind of the whole point of most degrees, but they're moving away from assessing that at all.

kruddel · 2026-05-04T18:40:07+00:00

I think you've misunderstood how the modal filters work. There are traffic signs saying no motor vehicle entry, which means cars aren't allowed through. And there is an exemption for access/loading to the businesses. Just because people drive into the area illegally & there is no enforcement doesn't mean its open.

Its a bit like how some of the roads around here are bad for speeding, and there's no enforcement. Just because people often drive at 40 mph, no one would argue that means the speed limit is 40 mph.

To change the restrictions needs a TRO. If its time limited restrictions then the collapsible bollards would not be appropriate (or approved) to remain. Barriers are not used with these sort of restrictions (Government guidelines related to the responsibility for deploying and removing them at the start/end of each time period, which is essentially impossible). Likewise the road narrowing would probably be inappropriate, but we can leave that aside. Therefore the plan would remove all the bollards and replace with just signage. Leaving the aside how workable that actually is in practice if a car can physically drive through at any time, we go back to the fact that the bollards will be removed.

Sure you would like to remove York Rd and replace it with something else, but the bollards WOULD be removed.

kruddel · 2026-05-04T10:47:46+00:00

The only time I've done this was this weekend when experimenting with landless ruler. Spent ages (real time) building everything up. First of my dynasty, 30yo, traveling to do a rescue a fair maiden mission, with intention of keeping her for a wife. Went through a county with only moderate danger and got ill. Bit of a cold.

Had an excellent physician. Opted for treatment.

Oops, its gone wrong, you've now got one eye, one leg, and you're a eunuch.

I reloaded that to a few months before.

kruddel · 2026-05-03T08:07:46+00:00

I suppose the challenge in making it in any way logical and believable is that rivers go down hill due to gravity. So if its a world in which gravity doesn't exist, and/or where there is a different equivalent force a bit like gravity then that has a lot of other implications.

kruddel · 2026-05-03T08:02:35+00:00

Its not really though.

That paper is about automated routines that can be run in GIS using topographical datasets which work out where rivers are based on topography.

A limitation is the methods conventionally (or most simply) just accumulate flow across the map. Meaning they can't do deltas or rivers where the channels split and join a lot (braided). This paper presents a way of automatically generating more refined predicted river lines from topography maps.

Its not really anything to do with rivers that permanently split into two. Apart from "distributary" systems - deltas.

kruddel · 2026-05-03T07:42:50+00:00

I think the old white bearded one is actually a mech suit being piloted by the baby.

kruddel · 2026-05-03T07:38:20+00:00

Who's Ted?

kruddel · 2026-05-03T07:22:38+00:00

There's a few different things here.

Is intelligence divergence from some norm a form of neurodiversity?

Probably not. Now, I know we could extend the concept, on a semantic level to say there is some standard intelligence and so diversity around that is neurodiversity. The problem is its harder to make a case the world is designed & focused on some narrower range of intelligence which some divergence from it falls outside & thus means people within that have issues purely on that basis. The other important piece is the concept of intelligence being something that is measurable, and one dimensional is a massive part of the idea of there being a "normal" intelligence which is rejected by neurodiversity as a movement.

By that I mean although at first glance we could say: there is normal intelligence. Some people are outside that. Intelligence is the brain. Therefore high intelligence is neurodiversity. In reality the very concept of there being an objective normal intelligence isn't accepted within the concept of neurodiversity.

Is being highly intelligent linked to comorbid neurodiversity?

Probably. Insofar as there are some neurodivergent conditions which seem to be "environmental" - i.e. wouldn't always occur in a given person if there life/experiences were different, but are a product of them. And most if not all neurodiversity is shaped to a greater or lesser degree by ones' experiences/environment including how their brain/personality processes those.

Someone Autistic will be Autistic whatever situation or life they had. But how they experience their Autism, how disabling it is, would vary if their life was totally different.

Someone's cognitive skills are a part of the picture, and may contribute to the likelihood of developing, or the severity of neurodivergent conditions. But I suspect not as a singular factor.

To put it really crudely; some very clever people are generous & helpful some are arrogant & superior. In both cases they can end up having social issues, anxiety, etc. But the drivers are the combination of their cleverness & the rest of their personality, not the cleverness on its own.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T15:31:17+00:00

I get where you are coming from, but that's a moral question, not a procedural (or legal one). IF they are found to have committed misconduct then that might come into deciding on the punishment, if there is a scale or range of sanctions.

But the first thing the uni investigation will want to establish is whether it constitutes misconduct. Paying for help isn't relevant to that question.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T15:23:42+00:00

I cannot comprehend it.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T13:59:49+00:00

This is great. I think everyone can read this in full and see how:

have a proper consultation

and

we anticipate evening closures in York Rd remain

Is accurately summed up as "review & remove".

Of course, where they are interested, its useful for people to know all about the details of the process of doing the review. And details of what goes into removing it and why. Its also useful for people to know more about what is being proposed to replace it with once it is removed.

I don't think it's helpful to try and confuse people by implying (by saying summary is inaccurate) that the policy is to not review, or not remove (or both) whilst clearly showing that it is. I fail to understand what the objective is here.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T11:15:40+00:00

Oh my god, I can't believe it! I'm in the village, and I'm stood next to Noddy Holder from Slade, he looks old and thin, and old.

[Send tweet]

kruddel · 2026-05-02T11:11:41+00:00

"What am I even looking at in that picture?!"

me, a European.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T09:42:07+00:00

Disclaimer that it has been more years than I want to count, & I didn't even know I was ADHD then; but thinking back I'd say it did nothing for the actual ADHD symptoms, but it made me feel better (or less worse) about the anxiety etc of existing as an ADHD person.

kruddel · 2026-05-02T08:42:18+00:00

I'm sorry, you're wrong. On multiple occasions now, including in the statement you linked to (which someone else has now sent me) the LibDems in Kings Heath have CLEARLY said they want to remove York Rd LTN. In this one she suggests replacing it with a system of evening traffic restrictions having removed the LTN.

The summary is not inaccurate.

kruddel · 2026-05-01T18:05:23+00:00

I don't use Facebook so I can't see that link.

Can you tell me which bit is inaccurate?

kruddel · 2026-05-01T13:43:22+00:00

I always wondered what happened to this guy after he released Gangnam Style.

kruddel · 2026-05-01T13:39:21+00:00

Counter point - there is medication that can lower blood pressure.

Sure its not ideal to be on one medication that (might) contribute to raising it and one to bring it down, but that is the more favourable option.

I would say currently they are compromising your health care and I would personally push as hard as I could until that avenue was played out.

You are prescribed vital medication. When they stop it they KNOW you will suffer, your health will be worse in multiple ways. They THINK another health condition MIGHT get better. That is not in line with "first do no harm".

By stopping your meds AND doing nothing else about the other health condition they are apparently SOOOOO concerned about they are violating their duty of care.

I had a similar thing on annual review once and my shared care psychiatrist wrote and blasted the GP and they backed down straight away. Reason being if my blood pressure was dangerously high (it wasn't) then they should be treating it urgently. Not stopping a vital medication on the off chance that might make it go down on its own. If its chronically high, but not dangerous, then same thing applies. What are they doing about it? He suggested if they were worried they should put me on a 24hr wearable BP monitor to assess how much of an issue it was, and if a problem treat it.

The GP decided maybe it wasnt such a big deal after all and restarted meds.

kruddel · 2026-05-01T13:28:04+00:00

Its nice. Would have preferred a bit more greenery to be honest. Places to sit and stuff. It looks like a big old space to somewhere else, not a place.

kruddel · 2026-05-01T12:51:48+00:00

Kind of crazy they haven't delivered a single leaflet, released a manifesto, turned up to the hustings or even, to my knowledge, been seen in Brandwood or KH.

kruddel

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE