🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@amerika

Well depends, for many things it can be... lets play with an example.

"You are poor, poor people have a harder time getting out of it because they dont have the resources to fix their situation. If you cant even take a shower or buy cloths how can you expect them to get a job even if they want to and are willing"

This is all objective facts and reasoning used to reason about why someone needs help.

Subjective reasoning equivelant:

"You are black, Ive seen a lot of poor black people so I just assume most black people are more poor than is fair, so you should get help just because you are black regardless of any other details"

@amerika

I think in being fair considering the nuance and characteristics of a person can often be a requirement, yes.

@amerika

Impartiality would be treating someone the same if they are black or white. IF you think this is not good then we clearly disagree.

Impartial doesnt mean everyone is treated the same, it means the characteristics you use to determine what help you should give someone is not due to subjective bias but rather objective reasoning.. facts and realities rather than feelings.

This seems like a pretty horrific thing to be against.

@amerika

> I don't see equality and fairness being the same.

I think you misread what I said. Equality (of outcome) and fairness are **not** the same.. Equity and fairness are the same. Equity is also not the same as equality since equality can mean equality of outcome or equality of oppertunity. Equity would effectively be the same as equality of oppertunity, or close to it, but distinctly different from equality of outcome. The reason for this is that while equality of outcome requires an unfair bias for people based on race or sex equality of oppertunity only requires people have the same oppertunity in an unbiased way.

> People need someone who understands their situation and why it is not an average or generic.

I agree on that, though im not sure it is in anyway contrary to what I am asserting here. Obviously equality of outcome would require some generic responses, but im not sure equity, or equality of oppertunity would.

> But, there are also people who are dysfunctional and need to be removed so the others do not have to subsidize them.

What does "removed" mean, and dysfunctional how? Obviously we put violent people away, so to an extent society seems to agree with you. But obviously this can be a dangerous power when abused.

I myself would agree with this to the extreme, even to the point of disagreeing with societal norms. We shouldnt simply remove someone from society, though that may need to be a temporary measure. We need to help rehabilitate people, which takes resources.

@amerika

Well equity and fairness are literally synonyms except that equity specifically includes impartiality whereas fairness is more general.

So while i can understand an issue with equality of outcome, I'm not sure why that is the same as saying you have an issue with equability, or the act of being fair and impartial.

@amerika

> I am skeptical of "fair" because this does not necessarily lead to "better."

Can you give an example where somethign which is fair is worse than something that is unfair? I suppose it would depend on who is defining fair. By what i would define as fair I cant find anything that would agree with this assertion.

> I am skeptical of "equality" because this always leads to parasitism.

Certainly our current notions in polticis of equality has some aspects that lead to that, no doubt.. but to say "always" seems like a huge leap. Though again depends what we mean by equality,if we are going by the idea that "everything must have an equal proportion of all sex and races" in that case I do agree. If equality however refers to equality of opportunity and NOT equality of outcome then I'd disagree.

@amerika

Well if you know anything about my opinions you'd know I have no love for the left either. But in this case they just dont happen to be whom I am addressing.

That said, equality in the sense of every race and sex must be in equal proportion in everything, is a flawed idea for sure. There are plenty of other flawed ideas of the left.

That said in their defense the general intent of creating a world that is a more fair place for people of all sexes and races is a good goal to want to achieve.

@amerika Probably because I deleted and redrafted it, your server probably had a ghost of the original it didnt clear from the cache

@amerika

I guess it depends on how you interpret the data. When I see a co morbidity in the range of 1% to 4% for a disease that has a background rate of 1% in the population my reaction is that Autism and ADHD have no link of any kind. The comorbidity can be explained away simply by looking at the background rate.

BTW I think you intended this as a reply to a post but instead made it a top level post.

A friend of mine had remarked to this post out of channel saying:

> ADHD and autism have an even higher comorbidity rate, AFAIK, which is interesting

I find this an interesting follow up, so here is my response:

Sort of, in the case of ADHD its far more complicated... for starters the overwhelming majority of comorbidity is subclinical in this case (so doesn't typically count as true comorbidity). Moreover the comorbidity is unidirectional.

To put numbers to it (according to the best study I know of anyway):

* According to their interactions with parents and teachers comorbidity is only 3.2% and 2.6% respectively.

* For those with Autism about 1.2% of them have clinical ADHD while 31.4% are subclinical (their symptoms do not qualify for a ADHD diagnosis but they show some ADHD like properties)

* For those with ADHD about 4.1% of them have clinical Autism while 5.7% are subclinical.

So in reality the comorbidity is much much less between ADHD and Autism. I dont know off hand the comorbidity between BD and ADHD for subclinical but it likely is much higher than the numbers for Autism and ADHD

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/aur.3146

#BD #ADHD #Bipolar #Science #Biology #Medicine #Neurodivergent

This is pretty much what most Republicans sound like to me at this point.

#USPol #Republican #Republicans #Conservative

@olives yea we were still fixing things a bit... I **think** all the backend stuff and sluggishness is fixed now. just working on some ui minor things and were good.

If you see anymore weirdness please let me know.

Still sounds weird every time I see the little label next to my name reminding me that I am on the W3C Advisory Committee... So cool!

#W3C #Programming #ComputerScience #Computers #Computing #CS

What it feels like using AWS hosting as the owner of a startup....

Just testing a post real quick...

Ok everyone we just doubled up the nodes to machines twice as big as well... I hope that should be the last of it to get rid of the sluggishness... Anyone still seeing any slowness on #QOTO?

@Raccoon

Not sure what this is in reference to. What did Biden do this time?

@joel

Nice, I'm a sucker for a good Dragon Quest. Might have to snatch it up if i can find time to even play.