Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 01:56:04 JST Paul Cantrell

   After years of careful observation and listening, I am firmly and deeply convinced that neurodivergence is real.

   I have serious doubts about the existence of neurotypicality, though.

   • Embed this notice
     maya_b (maya_b@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 01:57:16 JST maya_b

     in reply to

     @inthehands

     the bell curve is still round at the top

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 01:58:15 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     What I mean by that is I doubt there is even one single truly “neurotypical” person on this Earth whose brain is actually average in every important dimension of brain variation.

     2/

     Rich Felker, Steve's Place and Kermode repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:05:07 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     In the 1950s, the Air Force realized that planes were crashing because cockpits didn’t actually fit the pilots’ bodies. Wrong size = danger!! They commissioned a researcher to develop a new, more correct set of standard dimensions for the seat, yoke, etc.

     That researcher, Gilbert S. Daniels, came up with 10 body measurements that matter to cockpit size. He gathered measurements of several thousand pilots. And the number of people who were at the average for all ten measurements? Zero. Not a single one.

     “Average” proved to be a statistical construct, not a thing that actually exists as a person.

     https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/on-average/

     3/

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
     Rich Felker repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:09:15 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     High-dimensional data has this property: it is extremely unlikely that there will be a data point situation at the exact center.

     It’s the high dimensionality that’s important here. One person might be at some sort of average on •one• dimension, but for them to be at the average on •all• dimensions grows exponentially less likely as the number of dimensions increases.

     It’s like trying to roll all threes with a set of dice. Odds of that with one die? 1 in 6. Odds with two dice? 1 in 36. Odds with 10 dice? 1 in ~60 million.

     4/

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Yeshaya Lazarevich (alter_kaker@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:14:10 JST Yeshaya Lazarevich

     in reply to

     @inthehands I wonder what this means for something like neurology, where we don't even know how many dimensions there are, or if that number is even fixed and not its own dimension!!!

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:15:23 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     Daniels was looking at just 10 easily quantifiable body measurements. How many important dimensions of variations are there in a human mind? How hard are they to measure? How likely is it that even one single “average” mind exists on Earth?? The odds are vanishingly small.

     [Napkin sketch: assume there are a paltry 20 dimensions of brain variation. (Surely that’s low.) Assume there’s a 1 in 5 change of being completely “normal” in each. (Surely that’s high.) Even that absurd hypothetical gives a 1 in 10,000 chance that a •single• completely average mind exists in a population of 8.3 billion.]

     5/

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandra Magin 🏳️‍🌈 (recursive@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:17:17 JST Alexandra Magin 🏳️‍🌈

     in reply to

     @inthehands I generally consider "neurological" to be a hegemonic ideal, that some people manage to imitate sufficiently well

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:20:43 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     My general framework for thinking about this stuff:

     - Brains vary a lot, in a lot of different ways.

     - We have names for a few variations, or common patterns of variation. That can be useful, but it’s hardly complete.

     - There’s a wealth of as-yet-unnamed neurodivergences out there.

     - It’s all but certain that •everyone’s• mind is atypical is one way or another.

     - Comparison with, aspiration to, or forced conformance to the nonexistent “average” mind is unhelpful, frequently harmful.

     - Embracing variation is the only reasonable (or humane) approach.

     6/

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:21:36 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Alexandra Magin 🏳️‍🌈

     @recursive Assuming you mean “neutotypical” but autocorrect? If so, strong agree

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:23:39 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     In that story of the Air Force measurements, the research team came up with a completely radical suggestion:

     Make the seats adjustable.

     WHOA 🤯

     “Adjustable seats.” seems to me like a great starting point for thinking about variations in human minds.

     7/

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:33:16 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     RE: https://hachyderm.io/@dalias/112199018896611847

     @inthehands

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:34:01 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     None of the above is even proper neuroscience or psychology. It’s just a framing of the question, a way to avoid ridiculous assumptions and broken approaches, a way to avoid hurting other people and ourselves.

     Variation is normal. Let’s expect it, design for it, work •with• it — in others, and in ourselves.

     8/

     Jake Hildreth (acorn) :blacker_heart_outline: repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:36:30 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     “Make the seats adjustable” is a thought I bring to teaching, for example: Does the context I’m creating for learning accommodate people with all different kinds of minds? What variations am I not accommodating? Can I make some things more individually adjustable to better embrace those variations?

     Total adjustability is impossible; infinite flexibility is impossible. But as an ongoing effort, as a •direction•, this work is both feasible and useful.

     9/

     Rich Felker repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:38:49 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Rich Felker

     Several replies think thoughts along the lines of this one from @dalias, and I strongly agree. The •most• neurodivergent who simply cannot conform to narrow, normative expectations are doing the hard work of creating flexibility for •everyone• (see “curb cut effect”).

     https://hachyderm.io/@dalias/112199018896611847

     10/

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
     Rich Felker repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:44:51 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Thommy

     @thomasjwebb
     Strong agree. I’m cis het on paper — yet have enough gender noncomformance to have caused me personal pain and distress in my peer interactions, and to have forced me to fight hard for my own gender identity against the current. I don’t feel entirely comfortable claiming the banner of “queer” because that word importantly captures hardships I’ve never known and struggles that are not mine…but I’ve always felt more at ease in queer-friendly spaces, because I know that I too am more likely to be safe and accepted there too.

   • Embed this notice
     Thommy (thomasjwebb@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:44:52 JST Thommy

     in reply to

     @inthehands this is very much my reasoning for why I don't fully buy that cis het people exist. I mean practically speaking they do and they're the majority, but the ideals might not actually describe anyone.

     I think even if you were to try clustering things, it would be multiple clusters, not one big cluster around the means of all the parameters.

     Adjustable seats is a great metaphor for freedom in general. You can't paternalistically design society for everyone even if you wanted to.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:45:54 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Fish Id Wardrobe

     @fishidwardrobe
     Correct!

   • Embed this notice
     Fish Id Wardrobe (fishidwardrobe@mastodon.me.uk)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 02:45:55 JST Fish Id Wardrobe

     in reply to

     @inthehands iirc, Daniels was only looking at airforce personel — and only at men!

     so you would expect some commonality. but, no.

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandra Magin 🏳️‍🌈 (recursive@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:07:35 JST Alexandra Magin 🏳️‍🌈

     in reply to

     @inthehands darn autocarrot

   • Embed this notice
     Luke Kanies (lkanies@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:18:06 JST Luke Kanies

     in reply to

     @inthehands I quite like this model.

     I do wonder what it means for communicating about this, though. I try to say “allistic” instead of “neurotypical”, because I don’t like the normative implications of the latter. But maybe it also is more precise about what’s different?

     I’d hate to lose the ability to say “I’m different in this specific way”, just like someone who needs glasses has a different disability than someone who rides a wheelchair.

     But I suppose that just speaks to moving beyond this rough binary or trinary (with adhd in there too), and into specific differences and what they mean.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:50:13 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • josh susser

     @joshsusser I would consider these to be three independent dimensions (clustered, maybe, but independent):

     - being able to intuit emotional subtext from nonverbal affect
     - obsession with social status
     - inability to focus without social support

     …and the sooner we recognize them as such, the sooner we actually start seeing people as they are.

   • Embed this notice
     josh susser (joshsusser@autistics.life)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:50:14 JST josh susser

     in reply to

     @inthehands Yes, this whole thread. Basically how I've thought about this for years. There's no such thing as a neurotypical person. Statistically speaking, pretty much everyone is #neurodivergent.

     I do think the next question to ask is, what characterizes the neurotype we think of as neurotypical? I do think there is a most-common neurotype that dominates modern society, even if it's not the average of human cognition or the baseline from which other neurotypes diverge. Something about being able to intuit emotional subtext from nonverbal affect, along with an obsession with social status and inability to focus without social support.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:55:22 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Yeshaya Lazarevich

     @alter_kaker
     Yeah, just vast terra icognita; most of our understanding of the mind is still “here be dragons.”

     The things is, my “average is highly unlikely to exist” argument doesn’t depend on knowing any of that. If we assume the space of possibly variations is highly multidimensional, then it’s basically QED without any further knowledge needed!

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 04:58:26 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Luke Kanies

     @lkanies
     I understand “allistic” as meaning “not autistic,” which to my mind is at all not synonymous with “neurotypical.”

     I think terms like “autistic” and ”ADHD” can be very useful inasmuch as they identify common patterns, just like your example of wheelchairs and glasses. I’m all in favor of that.

     I’m just arguing against remembering that “not on the checklist of named diagnostic patterns” does not mean “person who fits some imagine archetype of typicality.”

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:01:51 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • josh susser
     • Murdoc Addams 🧛🏻:ri: 🇨🇦

     @murdoc @joshsusser
     That model of “NTs” is the kind of thing I’m arguing against. I don’t think it holds up to scrutiny.

     I’d argue instead that there’s a lot of variation both in where we start and in how we grow, and we’re currently papering over a lot of the variation with the idea that there is such a thing as a “typical” person.

   • Embed this notice
     Murdoc Addams 🧛🏻:ri: 🇨🇦 (murdoc@autistics.life)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:01:52 JST Murdoc Addams 🧛🏻:ri: 🇨🇦

     in reply to

     • josh susser

     @joshsusser @inthehands
     I tend to think of NTs as more generalists, at least from where they start off in life. Like a stem cell, floating through the body mostly at random until it finds a place it is needed, then it differentiates.

     Whereas NDs are more specialists from the start, like an already differentiated cell, randomly floating around looking for a place/role that it can function properly and thrive. (Yes there's some commentary on society built in there.)

     How to parse this into traits or dimensions I don't know right now.

     (But hey, yet another ND analogy for my ever-growing collection!)

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:14:41 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     Per replies, something I need to clarify:

     We’ve often use the word “neurotypical” to mean “neither autistic nor ADHD.” That might be useful as a shorthand, I guess, but it’s that mode of thought I’m specifically arguing against here: creating a single catch-all category defined as a negative, calling it “normal,” and assuming that it fits most people.

     That doesn’t stand up to empirical scrutiny, and I don’t think it’s particularly healthy or helpful.

     11/

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:21:12 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     A lot of conversations about neurodivergence take the form of the first image below. I’m arguing to adopt the framing of the second image instead (except 100- or 1000-dimensional instead of 2-dimensional).

     We’ve identified a few clusterings in a space of extraordinary and beautiful variation, and given those clusterings names. How useful those names are! How little they capture, even so! How much variation remains unnamed! How much variation must exist within every human being!

     12/

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:35:40 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • V

     @miss_rodent
     Yup yup. Clusters are at best fuzzy; boundaries are human inventions.

   • Embed this notice
     V (miss_rodent@girlcock.club)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:35:42 JST V

     in reply to

     @inthehands It's worth noting that a lot of those clusters already have large spheres of overlap with other neuroatypicality clusters.
     Like - I have a schizo-spectrum disorder.
     This comes, typically, with 'autistic' traits. Whether I would also fit into the autistic cloud or not is indeterminate, and ultimately, largely meaningless, because the 'schizo' cloud I do fit into the range of already accounts for most of those traits anyway.
     So even in clusters, taking them too strictly is... messy.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:39:02 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     There is variation in everyone, but society / context / environment makes that variation more burdensome for some than for others. “Neurotypical” is not a thing that anyone •is•, but rather an archetype that human systems are designed for / evolved around.

     When we recognize that “neurotypical” is an archetype and not an actual person, we can reach the same insight that the Air Force reached: you don’t build things to some single optimal set of “normal” dimensions; you make things more adjustable.

     13/

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:43:03 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Guitarsophist

     @jredlund
     Yes. See the end of the thread.

   • Embed this notice
     Guitarsophist (jredlund@social.linux.pizza)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:43:05 JST Guitarsophist

     in reply to

     @inthehands I think you are saying that there are multiple spectrums and we are all on several of them. But some of us have more difficulty fitting in to the rest of society and have to do more masking and compensating to survive.

     My grandson is autistic, so I am learning about this.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:49:37 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Hazel-Quercus 🟡⚪🟣⚫

     @coppercrush

     Yes. And note the “average” here isn’t always even truly the midpoint of the population, but rather the locus of power: much of society is built around men, for example, when being male is not even typical.

   • Embed this notice
     Hazel-Quercus 🟡⚪🟣⚫ (coppercrush@beige.party)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 05:49:38 JST Hazel-Quercus 🟡⚪🟣⚫

     in reply to

     @inthehands beautifully communicated and thought out

     'average isn't real'

     this is in so ways why we as a species are 'failing'. we have built a society on an average (determined by the most privileged among us).

     racial average. gendered average. abled average. prosperity average. medical average.

     none of this averaging works because on an individual basis it is never accurate. we are all a bunch of overlapping blobs and spending all of this time trying to precicely categorize each and every one of us into specific boxes is both a gigantic waste of time and an oppressive tool that guarantees our needs won't be met.

     this is of course extremely relevant in the conversation (and widespread adoption by those in power) around AI, as one big gigantic averaging tool.

   • Embed this notice
     Emmy - Dial Tone *biiiiip* (sillycoelophysis@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 06:48:28 JST Emmy - Dial Tone *biiiiip*

     in reply to

     @inthehands I think I have been journeying my way through the same thoughts you've put down here. I watched a video on yt last night "30 signs you're masking autism" and it left me wondering if some of us are extraverted but high masking, creating the same draining effect from masking in social settings that would make one assume they are introverted. This goes double (triple, quadruple, etc?) for those of us who are closeted trans and/or queer.

     In transition and working through AuDHD masking, I'm finding myself feeling more proactively social. It's still draining, though I'm discovering that I can stick in there a lot longer if I notice when I need breaks and can take them quickly enough. If I simply run out to my car or to the bathroom for less than 2 minutes when I need to, I can stick out and even enjoy social settings for hours, even if I went there by myself.

     I mention all that to say: I used to think I was an introvert. Now, I'm pretty sure I'm not. Another trans person I follow joked about "transitioning to extravert," to which I now totally relate. This speaks to the idea of reduced or mitigated masking "changing" one's extraversion/introversion, or maybe actually revealing their extraversion. It could also bring the whole concept into question. What if nobody is introverted, but the drain is coming from whichever masks they bear? What if the masks are for an as-yet-unknown neurodivergence, or a novel combination of the known?

     To me that just loops perfectly into your thread at this point. Extraversion, introversion, neurodivergence, allism. Are these terms useful, or are they "average" concepts against which we compare ourselves only to our detriment?

     Paul Cantrell repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Luke Kanies (lkanies@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:02:16 JST Luke Kanies

     in reply to

     @inthehands yeah, that makes great sense. I was trying to “yes and”, not disagree :)

   • Embed this notice
     draNgNon (drangnon@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:06:45 JST draNgNon

     in reply to

     @inthehands 💯

     I've been becoming more and more convinced of it as I get older and realize I don't really interact with a single person who fits "neurotypical"

     that's... not my selection or confirmation bias. that's the term itself being a construct, like "reasonable person" is a legal construct.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:16:54 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Aaron

     @hosford42
     I’ve never found either autism or ADHD diagnostic lsits to describe me all that well, but I’ve certainly spent enough of my life feeling •divergent• for this all to be on my mind! (I often use the phrase “my as-yet-unnamed neurodivergence.”)

   • Embed this notice
     Aaron (hosford42@techhub.social)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:16:55 JST Aaron

     in reply to

     @inthehands Wow, this is an awesome thread! I didn't know this stuff even crossed your mind, and then you suddenly just lay it all out and obliterate the silly assumptions people make. As someone who does fit (a bit awkwardly at times) in the clusters we have defined as ADHD and autism, I really appreciate this perspective!

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:23:22 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Emmy - Dial Tone *biiiiip*

     @sillyCoelophysis
     “Are these terms useful?” → Yes, I think they are. Naming patterns is useful. Identifying commonly shared characteristics is useful. Creating anchor points for sharing experiences, strategies, and new understanding is useful. We can use these terms without being reductive, or assuming any one of them completely describes a person.

     It’s useful to have a word like “autistic” the same way it’s useful to have a word like “yellow,” even though yellow is a range of colors and there is no well-defined bright line where yellow becomes orange.

     It’s specifically “neurotypical” as a category of person I’m arguing against. “Orange” is a color, but “none of the above” is…not.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:27:00 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Luke Kanies

     @lkanies
     Yes, I do think we agree!

   • Embed this notice
     Sara Joy :happy_pepper: (sarajw@front-end.social)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:29:36 JST Sara Joy :happy_pepper:

     in reply to

     @inthehands yes yes yes yes this

     Very much of the opinion that modern life is far too intense, and those that struggle with the (increasingly narrow) way of being that allows you to thrive in it are seeking help one way or another - be that via diagnosis, medication, therapy, drugs...

     "We didn't have that back then!"

     Oh yes you did. Was life as expensive, as full of tricks to con you at every turn, as competitive for every job, as precarious?

     We are safer than ever, but so very stressed.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:40:32 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Redish Lab

     @adredish
     “…the amount of work they are now demanding I do…”

     Hard to respond to that without knowing more about the “they” there, and the work that’s being demanded.

     I’ve certainly seen/heard of administrators blasting through the wall like the Kool-Aid man with some powerpoint-sized notion of teaching reform that captured their kitten-like attention, forcing everyone to soldier through their half-baked mandate until the laser pointer moves and their nonsense attention wanders elsewhere. (Minneapolis Public Schools is just rife with this.)

     I’ve also seen/heard of teachers grousing over having to do what I consider the basic work of teaching — which is in fact quite difficult work — and getting angry because they’re holding on tight to teaching methods that are lousy (and always were) but are familiar, and now are a a kind of psychological safety mechanism, not noticing how poorly those methods work and how much harm they do (and always did).

   • Embed this notice
     Redish Lab (adredish@neuromatch.social)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:40:33 JST Redish Lab

     in reply to

     RE: https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/115764426529441813

     @inthehands

     While I very much like the goal of "make the seats adjustable", I would really like to see a little more acceptance of the (neuro)diversity of teachers --- there used to be an attitude that a student should figure out how they can learn from a teacher --- now it is all on the teacher to figure out how to accommodate the student.*

     Maybe there's some way to talk about meeting in the middle?

     * You wouldn't believe the amount of work they are now demanding I do to accommodate hypothetical students who have never actually asked for changes. I'm getting very close to saying "F*** it. I have other, more important things to do." I do like teaching. I enjoy it. A lot of students love my class. Many have said that it was their favorite class they took in college. But teaching is supposed to be one small part of my job (if at all). The extra work being demanded is interfering with the rest of the important things that I do. At some point, these burdens are going to preclude me being willing to do the work.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:43:26 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Captain Button

     @cptbutton

     Well, yes, and this is the work! You don’t just add some adjustability and call it good forever; keep paying attention to the actual impact on actual people, and you keep learning — on out to infinity!

   • Embed this notice
     Captain Button (cptbutton@dice.camp)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 07:43:27 JST Captain Button

     in reply to

     @inthehands

     I quite agree.

     Though then you have to consider how big a range of adjustableness is enough.

     I recall reading* that in the 1970s US military equipment was designed to fit 90% of the male population. The adjustable seat wouldn't go low enough for the tallest 5% of men, or high enough for the shortest 5%, etc.

     * In a book about the then hypothetical integration of women into most military roles. The book noted the 5% shortest men line would exclude 30% of women, as I recall it.

   • Embed this notice
     Aaron (hosford42@techhub.social)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 08:08:40 JST Aaron

     in reply to

     @inthehands Like many autistic people, I have encyclopedic recall for things that interest me -- neurodivergence being one of those topics. If you ever want to explore possible matches for your particular neurodivergence, I'd be happy to share that collected information.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Dec-2025 08:08:40 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Aaron

     @hosford42
     That’s a kind offer! I don’t really feel like I’m in need of a diagnostic label: I have a pretty good sense of how my brain works, and I’m quite comfortable with it and generally able to navigate the world both effectively and happily. Now 13-year-old Paul probably could have used that…!

     (I’ve heard mention of some people arguing for “giftedness” as a form of neurodivergence in itself, and although that term really gives me the ick, I suspect the category may be a good fit. Among other things: “encyclopedic recall for areas of interest” describes me too! I remember doing one autism self-diagnosis where the entire first section on “giftedness” was all, “yup, yup, oh wow, yup! Maybe I am…” and then the •all• the subsequent sections were just “nope, nope, nope, not that either, nope….”)