Internet's view on people with Autism

Post Reply New Topic

Also should your opinion just be postiive negative don't care or should we live in a world where deeper thoughts and feelings are possible?

This sort of analysis is obviously flawed but I also suspect things will also fluctuate with the level of activity on the internet at any one time - the response to the shooting at Newton has been particularly aggressive about people on the spectrum and although there is an attempt to debunk the connection between violence and ASCs the majority of posts are extremely negative and it is these that have been flooding the internet recently.

Even people with a generally positive view will often find themselves discussing problems rather than the positives and then if you take into account all the curebies who spend a lot of time and energy getting a high profile for their views - groups like DAN for example - you can see that the balance tipping towards negative views is highly likely at the moment and mostly based on ignorance and prejudice.
A site like this will not have the sophistication to see the difference between someone asking for help with a problem and someone expressing a negative view.

I was hoping that I was seeing sarcasm in this thread, because I can't see why anyone would waste more than 60 seconds on this site and not come to the conclusion that it's effectively an online 8-ball.

Even assuming that the site's founder(s) are actually telling the truth about how the site works, their methodology is not subject to any review, and judging from the results shown above, is pretty obviously off. If they wanted to act like they were researching a methodology, then we could just laugh about the results.

I personally think that's reading too much into it, and I doubt there is anything but the crudest algorith driving the results.

Does it measure 10 "Autism is the work of the devil" posts from a troll 10x one "favorable" post on WP? Does it measure the "favorable" from the US against the "unfavorable" of the Grand Duchy of FancyHairBurg?

Also, does it take into account the influence of say....the USA Today or the New York Times against an article in.....the Flying Eagle Herald of Rachel, NV? Does it value the trolling sites of Facebook with the page of ASAN?

Short version, this is useless until proven otherwise. As a change from worrying about this sort of site, might I suggest writing letters to a local legislator?

Can the internet have a view anyway?

It can only count things and analyse according to an algorithm provided by a person who may or may not have a vested interest in producing data with an intrinsic bias towards their own opinion, it can not form an opinion for itself.

Reading articles online and taking a peek at the comments indicates just how many people think poorly of those on the spectrum (especially the higher-functioning individuals). Comments I often see on the Internet are:
"Lock them all up. They are all ticking time-bombs." (In response to Sandy Hook)
"Asperger's made him kill those innocent kids, nothing else." (Also referring to Adam Lanza)
"They [those with AS] need to be sent to death camps and gassed." (The uploader of a YT video eventually deleted this little gem).
"Aspies are all perverts and have no remorse for their actions, while autistics are more mechanical and are not violent." (Made by the same person who left the above comment)
"Aspies play pocket pool in class" (Also made by the same user)
"I had an Aspie neighbor who stole over $30,000 and left taunting calls and emails about it. He won't get in trouble because he plays the autism card." (Left on a U.K. site in relation to an article about autism)

There are hundreds, if not thousands of examples of this exact sentiment in regards to ASDs. It's not as if the Internet is home to the brightest of hominids...

I find the comments found at the bottom of some articles to be disgusting. I also realize that if you look at the level of writing ability shown in some of these posts, it's a reasonable assumption that the posters don't hold positions of power.

With the possible exception of one media outlet's comment section (I believe those posters are paid subscribers), I'm not too concerned about the people writing in to these stories.

Has anyone ever reached out to a journalist to try to correct some misunderstandings in the article(s) themselves?

Nazi - 48% positive (only 42% negative)
Murder - 53% positive
Mutilation - 73% positive
Genocide - 38% positive, 29% negative

Okaaaay...

Now, if I were on facebook I'd LIKE your comment then this lovely little algorithm would find another positive score for fascism even though I'm anti-fascism

This is kinda fun.

"The internet is positive about negative things."
"The internet is negative about double negatives."
"The internet is negative about nothing."
"The internet is very positive about itself."
"The internet is positive about your face."

Results for 'xanax'
Negative5.1% 461 hits
Positive94.9% 8k+ hits
Indifferent0% 0 hits
Conclusion
The internet is very positive about xanax.

Wow.

The Internet doesn't think.

What started out as a tool for spies to share data evolved into a tool for geeks to share ideas and kill time. Then it turned into the Internet of Facebook-- a way to gossip without even picking up the phone.

Homo sapiens?? Really?? We're the only animal with a cerebral cortex. Damn shame so many of us stick our opposable thumbs up our butts and choose not to use it.

*fling poo*

In other thoughts about idiot media...

...can we deport idiots in general, back to their respective villages (say, maybe, on Pluto)??

I was reading about Piers Morgan's latest crock of burning poo with Alex Jones.

Where does he find these idiotic attention whores???

What is the world coming to, when slick slimeballs like Morgan give lots of attention to raving morons like Jones and Xavier Amador while common people with common sense who have something commonly recognizable as reason to say go unheard??

In defense of calling Morgan a slick slimeball, check out his Wikipedia bio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan

I'm not saying Wikipedia is the be-all and end-all of reliable information, but-- DANG!! Some days I feel as if I have no choice but to think that m aybe there's something to the Bilderberg Conspiracy. Whether there is or not-- What about this bio says, "Intelligent, informed, objective reporting of accurate information" to you???