It’s up to you if it helps you to think of it that way. However, if everyone is on the spectrum, then “autism” is less useful as a term for categorizing a group of people with a shared condition that may need help/accommodation in specific ways. How do you provide special services for autistic people when everyone is “on the spectrum”. There’s a solution, but requires a different way of categorizing people.

“spectrum” is a useful analogy to the EM spectrum, which is a literal spectrum. The autism spectrum is not a literal spectrum, we call it that because it’s a useful way to understand neurodiveristy. However, like any analogy, it eventually falls apart as you go deeper into applying it. It’s not the complete way to understand autism nor is it the only applicable analogy.

Autism is not fully understood, but it is characterized by several dimensions that each involve variation from the norm due to a complex of causes. This is why the “spectrum” analogy falls apart–it reduced autism to one dimension. Another analogy might be a crystal that grows in multiple directions, with more growth from the centre being divergence from the norm. Some crystals grow a little bit in all directions, some grow only in a couple directions, and every other combination of amount x direction.

What you’re describing is the Science Fantasy subgenre. If you haven’t already, like Sanctuary and Fringe are exactly what you’d be looking for.

I know you do.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

The estimate is 130-140 aircraft existed in the entire fleet, so sounds like the former.

Sure, I don’t disagree with what you said. Some will say Applied Science is a category of science, others will say it’s distinct from capital “S” Science. I don’t really care either way, the distinction I was making was: Science is a process of developing knowledge that explains the natural/observable universe, including the humans/societies within it, i.e. a way of understanding what is. Engineering is the application of scientific knowledge, principles, and methods of inquiry in the construction and development of technology–it does not seek to explain things about the world.

I guess there was Foldit 😅

That’s engineering, not science. There is no science gameplay, you just have science points that you spend.

AI bad. But also, video AI started with will Will Smith eating spaghetti just a couple years ago.

We keep talking about AI doing complex tasks right now and it’s limitations, then extrapolating its development linearly. It’s not linear and it’s not in one direction. It’s a exponential and rhizomatic process. Humans always over-estimate (ignoring hard limits) and under-estimate (thinking linearly) how these things go. With rocketships, with internet/social media, and now with AI.

It’s less that it’s bad for her and more that it’s another way the US is dismantling their own soft power. There are long term advantages to having the rich and powerful from around the world get their upper education in your universities.

In 5 years, Americans who fuck up while visiting Europe or Asia and get deported will have a meltdown thinking they’re being sent to Latin America.

Most of the traditional automakers will do keys or key fob without an app AFAIK.

For usability/get in and go, you can’t go wrong with a Toyota or Honda. Perhaps consider a used Prius prime (PHEV) if you’re on a budget

checks history notes

Whoosh. They’re not mutually exclusive.

An analogy is a comparison. I was comparing a case of labeling something I see as obviously terrorism to a case of labeling something obviously killing. I wasn’t making a comparison to say Tesla is equivalent to OBL.

Sure we can debate the definition of terrorism, which I’m open to being wrong about. When you say “calculated” I understand that as premeditated with some thought towards planning the action. Hypothetically say we have someone who regularly carries a gun, and is walking around during Pride parade. Say he’s historically anti-queer/DEI, what ever stereotype. Say for whatever reason he gets angry enough, something’s happened and it’s the last straw and he wants to put an end to the leftist agenda and starts shooting at the crowds, while spouting his political ideology. It’s a caricature, but has all the hallmarks of a terrorist attack except on the point not being “calculated”, it’s a spur of the moment, unplanned attack. I’d still call that terrorism.

Another point though, I think many of the people who have been vandalizing Tesla did calculate their actions. Especially the arson cases must have involved some degree of thought/planning. And part of that thought is the political stance that Musk is wrong and billionaires like Musk should be afraid of the people.

I wasn’t comparing Tesla to Osama Bin Laden? I was making an analogy to clarify my point of calling an obvious spade a spade. Terrorism doesn’t have to be calculated, it just has to be politically motivated. I happen to agree with the political motivations and stance of the violence in this case. That doesn’t change what it is.

Well that’s my point, we should be arguing the legitimacy of the action, not whether or not it constitutes terrorism, which it obviously is.

Totally agree.

This is coming from someone who doesn’t necessarily disagree with burning down Tesla dealerships.

1. Define terrorism

2. Explain how burning down Tesla dealerships to resist Elon’s political takeover is not terrorism