1507
submitted 1 year ago by imAadesh@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml

Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

If you start reading about autistic people, you will most likely hear a couple things very often. It’s not a law as every autistic person is different but three common things I hear and read often are:

  • thruthful to a the point of rudeness
  • often use logic where most people would use gut feeling or intuition
  • have a particular knack for justice, often in a binary sense

Obviously, there are a lot of other things that can identify or sum up autistic people but these fit the situation I‘m talking about. One more may be useful: we don’t suffer from the so called „framing effect“ where neurotypical people would make two different decisions on the same question according to the situation they’re in. Most autistic dont do this. We look at a problem without considering our current situation. Some say thats why we are less likely to become corrupt. We couldn’t care less if our friend really likes to work in our company. If someone else is better suited, he gets hired, for example.

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

This is a very poor understanding of autism. You've taken such a small sliver that this comparison is going to not only offend a lot of people but also confuse a lot of people. The given properties you're invoking are such a small subset of autism and not even that widespread and hell, it ignores the core reasoning behind some. Brutal honesty is often tied with inability to be empathetic. You're doing yourself a disservice using autism as your "model" here.

[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

Thanks for your thoughts. I simply disagree. Being autistic means something else for every person who fits the description and for me it is this.

Attacking my personal understanding and using the wording you do is overreaching and mean. Instead of telling me to not say something, you could ask what I meant or how I arrived to this conclusion. But you chose not to.

If you are either a psychologist or an autistic person, you may speak about your own ideas. If not, I ask you to leave autistic people talking about the experience of being autistic be.

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You literally just defeated your own argument. You just made the claim its your own personal definition and therefore would need to be described every single time you use it otherwise you would have a failure of communication.

Autism is different for everyone and that's why it's terrible to use it to describe the details of something.

And you aren't describing your own experience. You are describing a government system. If you are admitting it's extremely defined and only works in your head and not whoever you're talking to, you will have a failure to communicate.

Edit: actually, that folks disagreed with you enough to comment is more a sign of that failure than any explanation I can provide. And you still provided it as a way to describe other autistics despite claiming otherwise.

[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

Thank you for using less violent speech this time. I still don’t understand why you feel like you need to correct my opinion here. Again, if you‘re on the spectrum or an expert, feel free to identify yourself. Otherwise I will stay by my opinion. Have a good one.

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

feel free to identify yourself

Fuck that. No one should have to share their anything even remotely shared to their mental health for some sort of odd gatekeeping purposes.

I gave my opinion. You are a terrible communicator and using a condition in a way that is offensive and then trying to force people to put themselves when they may not want to. So fuck that even more. That's shameful behavior. If you want to be offensive and communicate poorly, so be it. That's my opinion. And so be it. If you can justify forcing people to do things and if you can justify using derogatory statements to describe other people, which you literally did, that's on you. We're done here.

[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

You realize that you are using abusive language while accusing me of being a terrible communicator? That is absolutely ironic.

Secondly, I solely reserved myself from being violently corrected in my opinion/experience by a person who does not show any credentials to do so and uses abusive speech. It’s a security function, nothing else.

You can try and turn this around all you want. It’s like telling a person of color that their account or opinion about people of color is shit while not at all having a say in that matter.

Gatekeeping, in opposition to your opinion, is keeping someone from a community, denying them rights or identity. Source: urban dictionary. You are trying to force your opinion on someone who is telling you that they are not accepting that unless you show that you have reason for this behavior.

I would not accept your opinion solely based on your way of communicating it but I would consider trying to to look past that if you had shown anything resembling experience.

I‘m sorry if this is not understandable for you. I really tried. Have a good one.

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

You realize you are also being abusive with your terminology and spreading of really poor stereotypes? You've also been condescending. You also tried to say explicitly something was only about you while trying to use that to describe literally other people? You also then continued to say your definition is yours alone but then tried to use it as a way to convey meaning to a general audience?

Abusive language isn't necessarily poor communication. There is nothing ironic there. It doesn't fit the definition of the word at all.

You've been both offensive and poor at communicating though.

If I need to say it, yes, I am, and you're a shitty person for even asking.

I'm done. And you're terrible and should be ashamed.

[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

Seeing you frothing at the mouth does give me some satisfaction, not gonna lie.

You‘re still oblivious to the fact that we may very well have misunderstood each other in the beginning and could have very well just discussed this in a meaningful way. You chose violence instead and I chose to let you hit a wall with me.

I suggest you think long and hard about the way you approach people. Just because someone is wrong does not mean you have the right to condescend on them and neither do you have the right to fault them for it. You started this by not being able to discuss in a healthy matter. This is on you and you alone.

this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
1507 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

48186 readers
1000 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS