I built Jonline for this purpose. If you’d be interested in deploying it, I’d love to help. https://github.com/JonLatane/jonline

I guess the flipside of this is, do we want poor/homeless people from groups our society dubs “overrepresented” to only be able to find help from organizations that specifically serve selected “overrepresented” groups? Are there no obvious bad sides to that?

Because you can’t really have the one without the other.

I might argue the opposite. What would that have added to this release?

Neat! Missed opportunity to name it “SQLer” (squealer) though.

Out of curiosity, what kind of physical shape are you in? I’m nearing 40 and have wanted kids my entire life, but similarly, haven’t found the right partner. If I ever felt I was too old to have kids I’d probably have no choice but to kill myself. But I’m also in excellent physical shape and feel no physically different than I did in my 20s (other than being stronger and more coordinated now).

I have health issues so there is that. I think most 40 yo if they go to the gym on a good routine can have the energy. Add in a reasonable job (not an AI startup with a hammock in the kitchen). But 40 you are rolling the dice. 40+ you can die from things and it is not unheard of. It is quite old in a way. You can also have issues unexpectedly that depleat capacity.

Just reread your comment. Don't kill yourself!!! Help raise your niece or nephew or friends kids. You can pass on social inheritence! And you can work in a cube at Google and send half the money to kids charities.

> And you can work in a cube at Google and

Only if you have a time machine

Ain't no more cubes at big tech companies, it's all open office

> If I ever felt I was too old to have kids I’d probably have no choice but to kill myself

sperm quantity and quality decreases with age. studies exist that suggest higher risk of autism when father's age >= 45.

you're not too old, but you should probably test & freeze some good sperm before you might actually be too old by the time you find the right person. this way you won't ever feel like you're too old to have kids. then the question becomes more of "how long and in what manner will my remaining health allow me to enjoy them"

I had kids 'early' for my peer group (early 30s when most are pushing 40) and there is a noticeable difference in the amount of energy I have. It's not playing games with kids (the stereotypical keeping up with the kids at the park) it's that early years of childhood mean that you have 5+ years of bad / shorter sleep and get sick more than you probably have since you were a child.

It’s only “misleading” if you’re so out of touch that you don’t know a substantial portion of the population is in crippling debt.

There’s nothing misleading about the fact that negative net worth is worse than zero. And a person without debt factually does have far more wealth than 10 million people in debt.

Using your logic, a person in debt living in a nice house driving a nice car is worse than a homeless person without any debt.

Another example of your logic, any MD with a huge student debt is worse off than pretty much everyone in undeveloped world?

Or a person with a business loan but a successful business.

Real estate, automobiles, credentials/degrees, and businesses are all assets that would counterbalance their debt. (Credentials and degrees are not liquid, but you'd be hard pressed to argue that a doctor's license isn't worth many dollars).

The much more likely situation is a person with no assets or money and some credit card debt. Indeed, a person with simply no money is better off than such a person.

Right, and they're arguing that the quoted statistic isn't counting credentials and degrees as assets, because there's not a convention for how to value them.

"Using your logic" is almost always an overreach that uncharitably extrapolates and puts words in a person's mouth, and this case is no different.

You used a generalization to attack the format of the message rather than its content.

If I rephrased it to a question about their thoughts how degree holders fit their model then suddenly it would be fine?

I think it has its place, say, summarizing a large legal document under discussion. That said, if part of what someone says involves citing AI, I’d rather they acknowledge AI as their source.

I think making it a “rule” just encourages people to use AI and not acknowledge its use.

I think “neurodivergence” is a better label if the goal is gaining strength in numbers. It fully encompasses autism and autism spectrum related conditions, plus ADHD and others. A lot of people don’t want the label “autistic,” but share experiences with people who do, and would love to offer solidarity as an “inside” rather than “outside” member of the community. We now have “AuDHD spectrum” as a thing, but really, I think optimum numbers might come from including folks who identify as “broadly neurodivergent.”

It also leaves room to start distinguishing/separating out more subtle variants of what we currently umbrella as “autism,” perhaps making it better defined in the future. And I kind of suspect doing this with “less profound” neurodivergencies could help folks with “more profound” (and rarer) cases.

To look at a historical case: Gay Rights didn’t make a lot of headway. But adding lesbians, trans folks, etc. ultimately did a lot of good for that community in the US.

I was recently labelled neurodivergent by a colleague at work, as far as I can tell this is simply because I am good with numbers and don't like parties. I'm not sure how I feel about this, I wouldn't say I am Autistic or show any representative characteristics.

Autism or well any form of neurodivergence are about how you work on the inside. It is not possible to observe how a person behaves and just diagnose someone. That is why getting a diagnosis is a whole process involving a trained professional.

Your colleague is full of shit. Generally, neurodivergence is for everyone who regularly experiences that the way their brain works causes them trouble.

Self diagnosis is surprisingly accurate but people also tend to under estimate the severity of their symptoms.

I don't really like the idea of my coworkers playing armchair psychologist with the people they work with. Especially if person didn't ask for it.

Symptoms of mental disorders can be normal human traits taken to the point it affects person so severely it's an impairment.

This means anything normal can be pointed to as evidence of a disorder.