I think that when people on autistic spectrum say “I like red”, they mean the option 1 (but normies often interpret it as something else, which sometimes gets the speaker in trouble); and when they hear someone else say “I like red”, they assume that the person meant the option 1 (often, it is not the case). Learning that the other options exists is an important part of developing the “theory of normie mind”.
How much this is literally true, I don’t know, it was meant as a “ha ha only serious” joke.
I’d flag that I don’t think non-autists literally think this way. It’s not like they consider all 13 options and select #7 or something. My impression is that ~90% of the work happens intuitively or subconsciously. Often a person would agree to their intended meaning after having it explained to them, but they wouldn’t naturally articulate it themselves.
To be more clear, this isn’t exactly how non-autists think, it’s more how nerds who are trying to understand non-autists think, think.
I think some of the time they’d agree with the clarified meaning… but also “often” they would treat it as an adversarial clarification and perhaps threateningly insinuate that you should stop adding clarity near their game.
(For reference: I’m not a nerd, I’m a language geek, and I think the main barrier to making really plausible and “human feeling” chatbots is (in some sense) figuring out to make them capable enough of manipulative insinuation (and defense from such attacks) that their powers start to feel like maybe they NEED to be Friendly for the machinery to feel safe to release into the wild?)
I think that when people on autistic spectrum say “I like red”, they mean the option 1 (but normies often interpret it as something else, which sometimes gets the speaker in trouble); and when they hear someone else say “I like red”, they assume that the person meant the option 1 (often, it is not the case). Learning that the other options exists is an important part of developing the “theory of normie mind”.
How much this is literally true, I don’t know, it was meant as a “ha ha only serious” joke.
Ah, got it.
I’d flag that I don’t think non-autists literally think this way. It’s not like they consider all 13 options and select #7 or something. My impression is that ~90% of the work happens intuitively or subconsciously. Often a person would agree to their intended meaning after having it explained to them, but they wouldn’t naturally articulate it themselves.
To be more clear, this isn’t exactly how non-autists think, it’s more how nerds who are trying to understand non-autists think, think.
I think some of the time they’d agree with the clarified meaning… but also “often” they would treat it as an adversarial clarification and perhaps threateningly insinuate that you should stop adding clarity near their game.
(For reference: I’m not a nerd, I’m a language geek, and I think the main barrier to making really plausible and “human feeling” chatbots is (in some sense) figuring out to make them capable enough of manipulative insinuation (and defense from such attacks) that their powers start to feel like maybe they NEED to be Friendly for the machinery to feel safe to release into the wild?)