Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

An anonymous reader writes "A device from MIT Media Labs that can pick up on people's emotions is being developed to help people with autism relate to those around them. It will alert its autistic user if the person they are talking to starts showing signs of getting bored or annoyed." From the article: "The 'emotional social intelligence prosthetic' device, which El Kaliouby is constructing along with MIT colleagues Rosalind Picard and Alea Teeters, consists of a camera small enough to be pinned to the side of a pair of glasses, connected to a hand-held computer running image recognition software plus software that can read the emotions these images show. If the wearer seems to be failing to engage his or her listener, the software makes the hand-held computer vibrate."

Comments

So Simple?

[JDSalinger]

According to TFA, autistic people cannot discern or interpret a bored look on someone's face, but can realize that feeling a vibration in their hand means that someone is bored. Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to. It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning. If this interaction is correct, then a big high five to the geniuses that found the vibration communication channel into autistic minds. Of course if this is not the case, how will a vibrator help? This sounds like an unlikely solution to me, but I have not studied autism. Perhaps, the importance of this study is not that it will actually help autistic people, but that our face recognition capabilities are getting to the point of being useable in today's society. -C

Re:So Simple?

[Red Flayer]

" It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning."

It's not about 'remembering' what it means. It's about interpreting what it means.

"This sounds like an unlikely solution to me, but I have not studied autism."

'Nuff said.

Re:So Simple?

[gid13]

Vibrators ALWAYS help. ;)

Re:So Simple?

[hackwrench]

I have Asperger's, similar to Autism. Show me a picture of a bored person. Tell me the person is bored. If you were to ask me what features would indicate to me that person is bord, I'd be hard press to tell you
Take the picture away. Show me videos of people and then ask me:
1. Which of those people have elements that are similar to the bored person.
I'd be hard pressed to answer that as well.

Re:So Simple?

[briglass]

People with autism are unable to discriminate the tiny differences in facial expression that are exaggerated (in an almost cartoon-like manner) in the brains of those without autism. Without a doubt, those with autism are more likely discriminate between the a tactile vibration and the lack of.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is simple... that's the point. Recognizing that someone is bored requires processing subtle facial expressions, body posture, language tone, eye movement, among others. Autistic children, for one reason or another, lack the ability to process the subtle clues. Replacing all these clues with a simple stimulus, such as a buzzer is a major leap forward. Especially in the computer world where Asperger's Syndrome (a mild form of autism) is more common (when compared to the rest of the population). Might help some of us geeks get dates...

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not quite like that. It's not so much the vibration that is important, but rather that the computer is doing the interpretation. Think of it this way: facial expressions are like an analog signal--there's a wide range of variation. But this device distills it down to a binary signal: bored or not bored. It's that that the autistic mind can't do on its own. You could use any sense you wanted to convey the binary signal, but what's important is that it is a clear signal with no ambiguity.

Re:So Simple?

[MobyDisk]

It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning.

You misunderstand autism. This has nothing to do with memory. Autistic people do not have the facial expression recognition algorithms that most humans have. So someone has implemented such an algorithm on a computer, and then the computer tells the autistic person what the expression means.

If this interaction is correct, then a big high five to the geniuses that found the vibration communication channel into autistic minds. Of course if this is not the case, how will a vibrator help?

The problem was no how to communicate with autistic minds. The vibration is irrelevant. This would work fine with a light, a sound, or a big glowing sign that says "shut up dummy, you are boring them to death!" The point is that the input is unambiguous. Unfortunately, facial expressions are very ambiguous.

Re:So Simple?

[Billosaur]

You misunderstand autism. This has nothing to do with memory. Autistic people do not have the facial expression recognition algorithms that most humans have. So someone has implemented such an algorithm on a computer, and then the computer tells the autistic person what the expression means.

I worked with the autistic population for about 7 years. I think it has not been established that autistic people lack facial expression recognition algorithms. From what I've seen, they cannot interpret what they see, lacking the ability to integrate facial expressions of others with their own feelings, and use that to create a picture of what someone else is feeling. The autistic individual tends to treat everything as an object, and they can recognize form and substance, but not emotionality. However, they can learn it, given enough conditioning and reinforcement, albeit it is very artificial and prone to error if certain situations occur which were not anticipated. This device may work as an excellent training tool for those who can use it properly, but it won't solve the problem in the long run.

Re:So Simple?

[temojen]

I don't think I have autism, or even aspergers, but I can't usually interpret when a woman is romatically interested in me. It would be really nice to have a device that could do this.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

One piece of research I've seen on autism is where they tracked the eye movement of people watching a scene in an old B&W movie where two actors were having a conversation. People without autism focused on the actor's faces, especially their eyes, and to a much lesser extent their mouths. People with autism paid attention to pretty much everything except the actor's faces - the more advanced the autism, the less they paid attention to the faces. They looked at stuff like a curtain in the background or a coffetable or a necklace. In non-autism cases, the lines that traced eye movement were a pretty clear pattern going back and forth between the two actors' eyes - with a few deviations. The autism lines were all over the place, they looked like random scribbles with a few concentrations on some random stuff like a necklace.

So, I think even if an autistic person views a face, they're not necessarily paying attention to it. They could be fixated on an ear lobe for example or something else that plays no role in figuring out the person's emotional state.

Re:So Simple?

[shotgunefx]

My niece is autistic. My personal belief is it's a signal processing problem. I think they have a hard time seperating things both sights and sounds.

I think this because somethings do get through. My niece responds to certain things (like "Elmo") by sight and sound. I notice most of those things tend to stand out visually and audibly.

There's been a few things I've been meaning to experiemnt with but just haven't gotten around to.

One is I'd like to try a pair of headphones (the trick would be getting her to wear them) driven by 3 microphones.

One on each headphone to allow sound in. Another that is wireless that when used mutes the microphones internal to the headphones to make that sound stand out.

The other is a way of visually being able to highlight various elements in a pic or video. The idea that it would help training the brain into seperating scene elements visually.

It's such a mystifying condition. Most of the time I can't even get her attention. (She knows some words but rarely uses them). Then on occasion I'll say something like "Say the alphabet" and instead of ignoring me, she'll rattle it off.

Re:So Simple?

[EvolveFuzzy]

Are you sure you don't need a device to get them interested in you? Maybe you should try alcohol.

Re:So Simple?

[pHatidic]

I used to have this problem, but then I just realized I didn't know what to look for. Like me, I'd guess you just have a bad case of Slashdotters. Here are a few signs for starters:

For girls you are seeing across the room: She plays with her hair, licks her lips, smiles at you, will make eye contact with you.

For girls you are interacting with: You squeeze her hand and she squeezes back, you ask her a question and she asks you the question back, you touch her arm and she doesn't flinch or move away, she compliments you on anything, you look like you are going to go somewhere and she asks if she can come, she laughs at your jokes, you walk away and she is waiting for you when you return, she is the one to initiate conversation with you, etc.

Re:So Simple?

[Njoyda Sauce]

I think most people would be hardpressed to be bored with that big a vibrator.

Re:So Simple?

[hey!]

The issue is not perception or memory, but of highly specific information processing capabilities that bridge high level geometric perceptions (shapes and so forth) and awareness of the mental state of others. It's rather like having a face-recognition system that detects Osama going through airport security and rings an alarm.

If you want to know what this is like, get married. In most cases, wives have a mechanism that alerts them to things like specks of dirt on the floor that their husbands lack. The husband can see it, it just doesn't enter his consciousness.

Re:So Simple?

[gEvil (beta)]

*yawn*

Re:So Simple?

[ryanov]

If she laughs when you're not funny -- that one is huge. Or if she ever utters the phrase "you're so funny" (even if you are).

Think, this device could be used to get basement-dwelling nerds dates -- not just for the autistic crowd!

Re:So Simple?

[jfengel]

Even non-Asperger's patients might have trouble articulating the features of a bored face. It's recognized intuitively, not intellectually, and it's that intuition you lack. You might even be able to train yourself to recognize the features consciously, if you chose, but that would be a huge congnitive strain to have to do.

(I spent some time studying with Asperger's patients to prepare for a role I was going to play. I wanted to play Iago in Othello as having Asperger's: somebody who consciously understood people's emotions and was able to manipulate them more effectively than one who only had an intuitive understanding of those emotions.)

Re:So Simple?

[gurutc]

I also have Aspergers, and one of the most painful things about it is that people can't believe it's possible to miss simple and seemingly impossibly obvious clues.

It's sad that folks don't know enough, yet still comment, to believe that something this simple would be a huge help.

I want one.

Re:So Simple?

[Punkrokkr]

Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to.

You made an interesting point, perhaps without even realizing it. Autistic individuals have an extremely difficult time making eye contact, or even looking at the person who is talking to them or vice versa, and from my experience they move around a lot too. This would be a big problem for the camera to stay focused on the other person.

Re:So Simple?

[Punkrokkr]

you touch her arm and she doesn't flinch or move away

Thanks, that's probably the funniest thing I've read on Slashdot today!

Re:So Simple?

[WiFiBro]

"I worked with the autistic population for about 7 years."
Ah! You might be able to help me. Once every while you have these people that are, as we say in our language, 'sticking'. They won't take hints that the conversation finished, maybe like the autistic people they made this signaller for. Maybe my toolkit is a bit small, like saying "wellllll.... 't was nice talking to you" ("yes! yes! it is! bla bla etcetera bla") and staring at my watch, that's about it.
Now what is the least rude, most helpful way and effective way to let them know?

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not always as obvious, unfortunately...

And there are false positives too (lack of sleep or lack of fresh air in room...)

Re:So Simple?

[Autistic]

I agree, but I think there is a little more to it.

I certainly do not see as much from peoples faces as other people can. But I can see a little. I can see stronger emotions than boredom.

But the other side is knowing that some type of response is necessary and what that response should be. I may see that someone is angry or is sad, but I don't necessarily know what to do about it. I don't know whether to try to approach and help or stand back and wait. Often times, the hesitation of response is seen as lack of understanding.

So I get accused of not detecting emotion a lot more than is the case. I can see it, but I don't necessarily respond to it in a way that would be expected. I'll do the wrong thing, or if I know that has failed too many times before, I'll do nothing at all.

Re:So Simple?

[fbjon]

..or he could just get one of these devices.

I mean, it's the perfect sex toy for geeks in need of company. The more the woman is bored by his endless talk about computers, the more it vibrates!

I leave it to the reader to imagine where, and on who, the appliance is applied.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the wearer seems to be failing to engage his or her listener, the software makes the hand-held computer vibrate.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Re:So Simple?

[jeez]

I think detecting a bored expression on somebody's face is a much more involved process than detecting the uniform vibration of a vibrator. Imagine how hard it is to program a computer to do the former, whereas there are sensors that could detect a vibration easily.

Re:So Simple?

[DurendalMac]

Generally, yes, they can't, but I can speak up as an autistic (very mild, not even as far down the ladder as Aspergers. They lumped me in with PDDNOS) who can recognize facial expressions. I might have trouble if it's a very subtle expression, but a lot of non-autistic people would too.

Re:So Simple?

[fbjon]

I guess this is meant for mildly autistic people: i.e. has to be able to keep the face towards another person.

Re:So Simple?

[ajnsue]

I agree completely with all of the comments regarding recognition of the cues. and think the developers are contributing to the science of understanding a still very misunderstood condition.
But I am curious what a HPA or Aspergers person would do with the information? Just walk away? Will they attempt to modify their speech pattern. Will they develop and experiment with methods of modifying their behaviour?
Hell - I know I bore and annoy a lot of people but I forge on because I can put the degree of their behaviour in context with the environment and the subject. "...so i am boring you, you still have to take my mcdonalds order...." Versus an aspy who may be frustrated by the context of the boredom. "...Am I csrrying on too much about how I want my hamburger cooked..?"

Re:So Simple?

[Tofino]

FUNNIEST one word reply in /. history.

Re:So Simple?

[wuffalicious]

What I'm waiting for is when they figure out how to use this as a marital aid. Your partner starts looking bored and bzzzzzzzzz!

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know a lot about autism, but I have a cousin who is autistic. I don't think the device in the article would help him much. He doesn't start a lot of conversations, and when he does talk to you, usually he only says one or two sentences. He's not long-winded enough to bore anyone. If he asks you a question, your answer better be short, because he tends to get easily distracted by other people and things in the room. He often doesn't even realize when someone is trying to talk to him, unless you stand directly in front of him, lightly place your hands on his shoulders, and speak while looking directly at him.

I have only really interacted with him during family emergencies, when people were quite tense and emotional. In these situations my autistic cousin defintely is aware that the people around him are feeling strong emotions. He just seems to have a hard time differentiating between various emotions in other people and connecting people's emotions to specific events. This difficulty seems to be worse if he was not present when the event that inspired the strong emotions in our family, such as a death, occurred. He may act inappropriately at first, until he works out enough of the connections between things that have happened and other people's emotions to understand his own feelings. The result is that he sort of has delayed reactions to events that cause strong emotions. I think that device in the article would actually confuse him, unless you could program it to provide different signals for different emotions, and did some sort of role-playing exercises with him to train him how to use it.

Re:So Simple?

[badspyro]

It's not simple at all.
I second the previous post, as I too have aspergers, and have struggled with this kind of thing for the majority of my life, so as far as I'm concerned, WOO WHOOO!!!!
for any of you interested in finding out more, check out the aspies for freedom website

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't give hints. Just tell them what you mean and explain why. As autictic people don't understand others very well, it is very important for them that you explain very clearly why you don't like that person, or why you don't want to talk with that person. For example "I am sorry, but I have no interest in the things you always talk about, so I would prefer not to talk with you about those things.". Also know that it is actually hard for them to understand that you don't like something that they like so much. You might think that they are freeks, but from their point of view, you are the freek and they just can't understand you.

Re:So Simple?

[gstoddart]

I'll take a stab at this ...

For girls you are seeing across the room: She plays with her hair, licks her lips, smiles at you, will make eye contact with you.

Can you accurately identify when she is looking at you or someone else? Do you think all such such signals are as overt as licking the lips? The signals can be a lot more muted and ambiguous, so it can be in a gray area where you can miss something subtle -- or hope to see something which isn't there. If she is NOT currently looking at you is that a summary rejection since all interested people are looking? Nor everyone is likely to have contact initiated based on their looks; you as like as not could go completely unnoticed.

For girls you are interacting with: You squeeze her hand and she squeezes back, you ask her a question and she asks you the question back, you touch her arm and she doesn't flinch or move away, she compliments you on anything, you look like you are going to go somewhere and she asks if she can come, she laughs at your jokes, you walk away and she is waiting for you when you return, she is the one to initiate conversation with you, etc.

But, you've put the cart before the horse. If you're already at the hand-squeezing stage, you're probably in posession of a few non-ambiguous signals. You also wouldn't use body contact to define some of the earlier stages of human interaction -- it could be completely inappropriate, and you'll seem a bigger dork. Have you tacitly been granted permission to be that close? Or are you just a bungling goon who wants to know if you touch her, she'll flinch?

I can be socially awkward. I find it difficult to engage in social contact with new people. I can't imagine someone with a 'real' disorder being given nice codified things like you've done and be expected to apply them. Because they are, after all, subjective and hit-and-miss in terms of their predictive value.

Even with my own 'plain old' (*) social awkwardness/geekiness, I don't think I could apply some of your cues -- at least not in the grossly simplified way you put them. There is just too much ambiguity in interpreting the responses from people, and I can't often tell where in that range something might lie.

(*) I'm neither Autistic, nor do I have Asberger's -- but like most human behaviour, I believe it's on a continuum, and I might have some of those characteristics without actually having the affliction per se.

Re:So Simple?

[asdfgl]

I do have Asperger's. I have learned that list before through trial and error, and know it to be broadly correct. The funny thing is that I still read the list and thought: What a nice and concise list. Might be useful.

Point being that even though knew those things already, I'm always open to hints, intellectual hints, as I don't get these things any other way...

Re:So Simple?

[McDutchie]

Once every while you have these people that are, as we say in our language, 'sticking'. They won't take hints that the conversation finished, [...] Now what is the least rude, most helpful way and effective way to let them know?

When addressing an autistic person, I'd just be explicit and matter-of-factly, but in a nice way. Like: "I enjoyed the conversation but I want to go and do something else now. Talk to you later", or "Thanks for the chat but I'm tired now and want to rest. See you tomorrow". A person who can't read hints will appreciate getting unambigious communication for a change.

Re:So Simple?

[shawb]

Another hint - a girl's left foot generally points toward whoever she's thinking about (I don't know if this is switched in left handed girls.) Main problem with this hint is that it could also mean that she is creeped out by whoever her foot is pointing at. But at least you can use this to ascertain where her attention is without having to stare her down (and staring someone down to see where their attention is would definately have something like the heisenberg uncertainty principle. If she is paying attention to you, she will probably turn away when she sees you looking. If she isn't paying attention, then you may catch it when you look at her. Looking at foot placement makes it a lot easier.

Re:So Simple?

[pHatidic]

From reading your response it sounds like your problem is self-confidence more than anything else. Don't overthink this stuff because then you'll only convince yourself that it's BS. I know that goes against everything the book of Slashdot teaches, but just trust me on this one.

Re:So Simple?

[logicnazi]

I certainly don't have aspergers (tho some people seem to act as if all math people do) but I couldn't tell you either of those things.

In fact I suspect most people couldn't pick out the features in virtue of which they new someone was bored much better than someone with aspergers. I suspect they would do better because they can immediatly tell whether someone is bored or not but for both cases it would seem to be something you need to learn explicitly.

It seems that much of our processing of faces and bodily expressions occurs entierly unconciously. People *look bored* to us and if we step back we can break this down into vacant eyed, glancing away, fidgety etc.. but phenomenologically they are presented as being bored to us not as having certain facial features from which we can then infer boredom (usually).

I think they have even worked out the parts of the brain responsible for this sort of processing but I could just be high.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

For most slashdotters, the surest sign that a woman is interested in you is very simple: she lets you tuck paper currency into her g-string!

Re:So Simple?

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

I have Asperger's, similar to Autism.
 
... ok is that a real diagnosis from an accredited professional, or is that a conclusion you have made on your own? I see many self-proclaimed high functioning autistics on various forums and starting to wonder if there is an emote test I might be missing.

Re:So Simple?

[pHatidic]

Do you have a source on this? Your low UID makes me less inclined to trust you on these matters.

Re:So Simple?

[dotpavan]

I can get a copy of that fairy tale? :)

Re:So Simple?

[AK Marc]

Of course if this is not the case, how will a vibrator help?

Well, mister sarcastic pompus ass, the vibrator is an indicator that the person seen is bored. That is a bit of information that, no matter what training is given, an autistic person will not be able to determine. It is like being given the answer to a question that you didn't even know to ask.

It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning. [...] I have not studied autism.

That is obvious. Absolutely everyone has a different "bored" face. Yes, they are usually quite similar. It is recognition of that similarity that the computer program can determine, but that autism prevents. You can't give someone 1,000,000 bored faces and expect them to memorize them all. Even if you were to do so, and the autistic person were to memorize them all, that would still not fix the problem. They won't pick up on the changes in expression. They won't be able to properly extrapolate the memorized data to the inexact world of facial expressions.

The brain of an autistic person does not work exactly the same way yours does. That you presume it does, then bash something that would help with the differences indicates that you are not only ignorant, but quite intolerant and offensive. Perhaps, one day, they will come up with one that will buzz you when you are being an insensitive ass. But you wouldn't buy it because it would be bugging you with its constant operation.

Re:So Simple?

[Mikkeles]

'It will alert its autistic user if the person they are talking to starts showing signs of getting bored or annoyed.'

I just talk about my favorite subject: maths. That way I don't have to guess if they're bored or annoyed!

Re:So Simple?

[TerranFury]

Basement-dwelling nerds? In college, it's the basement where you find who you're going to hook up with!

Re:So Simple?

[RKBA]

"Most of the time I can't even get her attention."

Maybe she's bored. ;-)

Re:So Simple?

[Pfhorrest]

When addressing an autistic person, I'd just be explicit and matter-of-factly, but in a nice way. Like: "I enjoyed the conversation but I want to go and do something else now. Talk to you later", or "Thanks for the chat but I'm tired now and want to rest. See you tomorrow". A person who can't read hints will appreciate getting unambigious communication for a change.

I'd like to add MUCH MUCH emphasis on the "in a nice way" part. When I was younger I was even more prone to ramble than I am now, and a teacher once instructed students to tell me "I don't want to talk to you, Forrest," since I wasn't getting the social cues. (Yes, I am borderline autistic and was much more so when I was younger). But just because we don't pick up on others' emotions well doesn't mean we don't have our own, and other students doing that *pissed me the hell off*, not only them but at the teacher who I figured out had told them to do so.

So yes, be clear and explicit, but also be very gentle. Treat conversations with austitic-type people like internet chats: there is no body language, everything must be communicated verbally, but there's still polite and impolite ways of getting your message across. (This probably explains why autistic type people, including most geeks, are so fond of internet communication...)

Re:So Simple?

[Suidae]

I'm the same way. I finally got tired of social ineptness in college and decided to make it an intellectual game. I spent hours and hours in the commons watching people interact, examining how people interacted and the expressions they used. I listened in on hours of mindless yammering small talk to see what made conversations interesting to people.

Through observation and practice I was able to bring up my social skills, at least with people who share similar interests or who do things I can ask them about. I'm still clueless about sports though.

It's something you can learn if you care to, it just doesn't come as a stock feature of some brains.

Re:So Simple?

[raduf]

      I was thinking about that. If a software (and not one on a supercomputer too) is able to distinguish between moods in real time, then a brain should do much better. It's about pattern recognition... if people can learn japanese kanji, or how to drive... Just have to find ways to train it, ne?. Or is there anything that stops autistic poeple from doing that?

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think he meant porn-style lip licking, but nervous-style lip licking.

Although either is a decent clue, really. It's just the latter tends to cost you less.

Re:So Simple?

[Da Masta]

Like the other poster mentioned, you need to boost your self-confidence.

You have to get over whatever shame you feel when you're 'rejected'. So you saw her smile at you and you walked over only to find out she was looking at the guy beside you. Move the fuck on! Play your cards right and you'll never have to see the bitch again anyway.

And yes, that's exactly how you should be thinking of any woman stupid enough to not see you as God's gift to them.

Of course, unless you're Brad Pitt, you're never gonna get it that easy. Sometimes, you'll have to fight for the girl, too. Just be a bigger asshole than her other suitors and she'll even appreciate you for it.

Ultimately, its you against the world, your seed against 3 billion others, so your girl needs to know you're man enough to handle the pressure.

Re:So Simple?

[rtb61]

Now the trick is to stop people who share a particlar system of thought and get bored by the over emotional endlessly repeated reactions of extroverts. Why is that extroverts demand that introverts must behave in a particular pattern or that only the extroverts choosen styles of communication are not boring.

After a while, even when you understand their emotions, you just get bored with continually having to adapt your behaviour to satisfy their extrovert needs and switch off to their expressions. Why not, when they continuosly fail accept alternate expressions of thought and just take offence when you try to explain it to them.

Introverts only really have problems when they let extroverts force them to try to behave like other extroverts. The power of mass media, full of nothing but empty extroverts in defining the bounds of desirable human behaviour.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

well, like every other nerd on this site i too have aspergers..probably related to that study finding smart people who reproduce end up with autistic kids....but yeah, it took until i was about 19 to learn to read emotions on people, and i do have to think about it conciously in order for it to work, however i find people very easy to manipulate now that i can also pretend to have those same emotions.

Re:So Simple?

[Eli Gottlieb]

And yes, that's exactly how you should be thinking of any woman stupid enough to not see you as God's gift to them.

Don't we call that arrogance? At the very least, conceit?

Re:So Simple?

[SirCyn]

I hear you buddy. I have Asperger's as well, and I have the opposite problem described in the article. I have a very hard tim telling if someone is interested in what I have to say. Being a geek, I'm very accustomed to blank stares of confusion.
But it's nearly impossible for me to tell if someone is anything in the mildly interested to not interested range. I can recognize large interest, and boredom. The middle is a gray area, and I've gotten used to assuming people are not interested in me. This assumption made an incredible impact on the number of friends I have and social situations.
So where do I buy one?

Re:So Simple?

[ZorinLynx]

Off topic, but I couldn't help thinking of Gadget Hackwrench, from the Rescue Rangers cartoon, when I saw your username.

She was a geek too! And a cute mouse at that.

-Zorin (Yes, I'm slightly disturbed.)

Re:So Simple?

[flamingnight]

Actually, the vibrator should work perfectly in this case.

Re:So Simple?

[overbaud]

"Can you accurately identify when she is looking at you or someone else?" Yes, walk over and say 'I noticed you were looking at me and so I thought I would come and say hi.' You'll have your answer in five seconds or less. It doesn't really call for a double blind study.

Re:So Simple?

[eonlabs]

I think they just don't want to admit that they just created a device that vibrates when someone looks bored.
I'm CERTAIN there's a market for that.

Re:So Simple?

[russellh]

Yes

But if the hair is standing up on the back of her neck, her teeth are barred, ears back, tail between her legs, then she's probably to be avoided. Don't make eye contact.

Re:So Simple?

[gstoddart]

You have to get over whatever shame you feel when you're 'rejected'. So you saw her smile at you and you walked over only to find out she was looking at the guy beside you. Move the fuck on! Play your cards right and you'll never have to see the bitch again anyway.

And yes, that's exactly how you should be thinking of any woman stupid enough to not see you as God's gift to them.

Well, we've moved very far from the topic of people with social liabilities to the full-on playa's guide to bangin' chicks and getting laid. It's a whole different sphere of things.

One is not having the innate mechanism to fully grasp social interactions and signals (or not well developed experience in it), and the other is how to be a womanizing bastard who picks up chicks in bars rather callously. The gap between the two is huge.

Personally, I'm not really interested in learning the latter, and certainly nobody with autism or Asberger's expects to be doing that. I was merely pointing out that the poster I was responding to seemed to have grossly oversimplified a rather complex series of social cues; which for the people the article is talking about, probably wouldn't be useful advice. And people with even minor social disorders probably aren't going to start being playas; they may not wish to be.

Not fully grokking some of the more subtle interplays between people doesn't mean you need to over compensate by getting your swerve on and putting it into full effect. Frankly, assuming that all women should see you as "God's gift" falls anywhere between massive conceit and downright misogyny.

Just be a bigger asshole than her other suitors and she'll even appreciate you for it.

Or, she'll think you're a bigger asshole and want nothing to do with you.

I get plenty of play from the hunnies -- by my standards, and in my own ways. A lot of women respond to a little respect, and being a 'nice guy' isn't always a huge liability; for them some guy coming on too strong isn't what they want. Not all strategies work for everyone, nor should they be tried by everyone -- otherwise we'd have a world full of Leisure Suit Larry's hitting on every woman in the bar.

Cheers

Re:So Simple?

[Slithe]

Not necessarily. I have yawned many times during presentations that I was engrossed with. There are several proposed hypotheses for the purpose of yawning. Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yawn for more information.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning.

Autism isn't an issue of memory. Humans don't parse body language by intellectually thinking it out (e.g. "His mouth is downturned, that equals 'frown', and frown equalls 'unhappy' Q.E.D."), there are actually specialized brain systems entirely for the purpose of quickly processing and comprehending body language at an unconscious level. This is obviously a very important survival trait.

Imagine looking at the bark of a tree, with all its little bumps and undulations and trying to figure out what the tree is "feeling." The conscious mind just can't take in and integrate that many individual features at one time. If the parts of the brain which perform, control, or recognize this integration are malfunctioning, no intellectual capacity on the part of the person is going to be able to make up for it.

Re:So Simple?

[SimonInOz]

So what you really need is some sort of disturbance in your pants to tell you when a women actually likes you ... no, wait

Re:So Simple?

[Domo-Sun]

I know someone who says he has Asperger's. He's very cold, callous, and he'll say, "That's my other line. Goodbye." and to people who bore him, "I don't even like you as a person. Don't call me again."

Or, "What part of 'I don't want to talk about this' are you not getting?"
Or, "This conversation bores me, change the subject."

I could go on and on.

I've had a suspicion he really is just a narcissistic sociopath. But, if this is Asperger's, then I can't see that he'd care what others are feeling, even with an emotional vibrator sidekick, because he has only empathy for himself, and not others.

Can someone tell me is that normal with Asperger's? Another friend told me that he's just a bitch because he knows someone with Asperger's who's really a nice guy. I've been told I might have it, and I'm nothing like this.

Re:So Simple?

[modecx]

No, it's called self-confidence, self-respect, self-regard, self-esteem, dignity, etc.. Women can smell it like mountain lions smell fear.

Arrogance is when you think you're god's gift to mankind, but everyone else thinks you're a wanker because of it, pretty much the same as conceit, which implies a bit more superiority complex than plain old arrogance, I think... Self-confidence is when you walk into a room and draw everyone's attention without even trying, or otherwise consciously
doing anything to attract their attention i.e. simply because of the personality you exude. It happens, it's real, and it's entirely a mental issue... That is to say, a poor, fat person can have and use it just as well or better than some Fabio lookalike that just drove up in a Ferrari.

The idea is, having confidence in oneself implies keeping that feeling inside and letting it out only subconsciously or psychically, while the more negative alternatives imply letting it out more directly through your mouth and/or mannerisms and persona.

Re:So Simple?

[glitch23]

For girls you are interacting with: You squeeze her hand and she squeezes back, you ask her a question and she asks you the question back, you touch her arm and she doesn't flinch or move away, she compliments you on anything, you look like you are going to go somewhere and she asks if she can come, she laughs at your jokes, you walk away and she is waiting for you when you return, she is the one to initiate conversation with you, etc.

Well, it's official. I don't get any of that so I'm truly a geek. What's worse is that it took a guy to tell me. :(

Re:So Simple?

[temojen]

Well, the existing mechanism only tells me when I'm interested in her, not when she's interested in me.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have Asperger's[...]

You and half of slashdot, it sometimes seems...ever since Asperger's got tagged as being somehow connected with genius. Well, I guess it gives you all an excuse for being social retards...

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been diagnosed with a "milder" form of Autisim, Asperges.

Personally, i have found that within very specific circumstances, I can learn/teach myself to react correctly to specific inputs from other people, such as boredom. This only works with people i have known for a particulary long time. I belive i am considered to be exceptionally high functioning among the autistic spectrum, so this possibly does not apply to others with austistic conditions.

I belive that learning like i do is the best approach. If this device actaully does perform well, it would be akin to replacing exercise with platic surgery.

Re:So Simple?

[badspyro]

not all of ous are like that, but quite a number of us can be very abrupt, as all the empathy we have is learnt empathy, which is far harder to gain, and many of us also have no tact what so ever.

I, presonaly, used to be the same, and it took me a loooong time to improve, and some would say I'm still not there.

Re:So Simple?

[Hektor_Troy]

Yeah, best stay away from those bitches!

Re:So Simple?

[Crafack]

Actually, a low UID could also indicate a person that over time has transcended geekiness, and risen to live among the "normal" population.

My own UID is fairly low, and I'm happily married...

My experience in these matters indicate that while you can dream of a situation where you can safely navigate the social waters by use of a gadget like the one from TFA, or a list of positive and/or negative clues, it will not be of any use.

The only thing, in my experience, that will aid you in your quest for a "normal life" is: Guts.

The second you overcome your low self-esteem and your fears of being rejected, you are on the right path.

The moment you dare to admit to yourself, and a girl you meet and perhaps want to date, that you are nervous, but act in spite of that nervousness, you are well along the path.

Being honest will lead to rejection after rejection, but rather be rejected before anything has happened, than when eventually you let the facade fall, and reveal the real you.

Lastly. Remember this: When you meet the right woman[*], all pretenses are wasted effort. She will see through your soul, and even the forgotten dark corners of your soul will be hers to see and love.

[*] or man, if that matches your gender or preference.

--
/Crafack

Re:So Simple?

[Bloke down the pub]

the existing mechanism only tells me when I'm interested in her

If it's her hand in there, she's interested.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

What I need is a device that records a question and answer, then gives a shock that increases in magnitude based on the repeat frequency of the question being asked.
I also need a tranquilizer dart pistol so I can take em down like a destructive rogue bull elephant, who can't take, no you can't rampage through the village destroying everything and hurting others, for an answer.

Re:So Simple?

[Eli Gottlieb]

The idea is, having confidence in oneself implies keeping that feeling inside and letting it out only subconsciously or psychically, while the more negative alternatives imply letting it out more directly through your mouth and/or mannerisms and persona.

Pretty much true. Still, what's the point of flirting with any woman (or man, if that's your cup of tea) if you don't actually give a shit about them? Neither I, nor anyone else most likely, want a sycophant for an S.O.

Re:So Simple?

[Anonymous Coward]

...but can realize that feeling a vibration in their hand means that someone is bored.

Many /.-ers have learned that feeling a vibration at the waist means a critical system has crashed. If we are trainable, then there is hope for the autistic.

Re:So Simple?

[Da Masta]

Well, we've moved very far from the topic of people with social liabilities to the full-on playa's guide to bangin' chicks and getting laid. It's a whole different sphere of things.

Not completely a different sphere, just different ends of the same spectrum.

I do understand what you mean, and my point wasn't intended to be as patronizing as it came out.

The way I see it, people with Autism/Aspergers/Slashdot-fever who have problems in social situations have them because of their inability to relate. I'm assuming someone, who is otherwise very intelligent, is unable to pick up on people's facial expressions because they themselves don't associate their own facial expressions with the reactions that normally cause them.

To add to that, I think they are very painfully aware of this and are afraid of social interactions because of this. Each bit of interaction, especially with someone they've never met before, is a potential cause of failure.

This is what needs to be overcome and I'm saying fearlessness is the answer. There is absolutely nothing to be lost in any social situation, regardless of how it goes! Worst case scenario, the other people walk away thinking you're a fucking nerd with no life. They thought that before you opened your mouth anyway, it's no big deal.

I think over time you'll find other peoples opinions really don't matter. So why talk to them in the first place, right? Humans are social creatures, we all need other people for something or other. It'd be a shame to not take advantage of other people's help just because you didn't know how to approach them and ask.

I wish a playa's guide to bangin' chicks and getting laid existed, but like you said, not all strategies work for everyone, nor should they be tried by everyone. That doesn't mean a good strategy wont work for most people, and shouldn't be tried by people who have no reason not to try it.

Here's mine:

If you want to increase your social aptitude, regardless of whether it's to weild power and authority or just to bang hot bitches (not necessarily in the back of a bus) you must concentrate on one thing: dominance. You're the manliest of men, all the men want to be you, all the women want to do you.

Understandably, it may require a drastic shift in mentality. A good start would be some stuff written by some manly men:

Real Programmers Don't Use Pascal

Bastard Operator From Hell

Move on to less nerdier fare once you grow some balls, such as:

The Best Page In The Universe

After that you'll have already come to the conclusion that only fags need to learn how to be cool, and this shit was all a waste of time because you were the baddest motherfucker in the world from day one.

Re:So Simple?

[modecx]

Still, what's the point of flirting with any woman (or man, if that's your cup of tea) if you don't actually give a shit about them? Neither I, nor anyone else most likely, want a sycophant for an S.O.

I still think you're hung up on the idea that having self-esteem makes you feel like you're superior to everyone... It dosen't. You can love yourself and still love everyone else, as the people they are, and without any pretenses. In fact, I'd argue that it's a requirement for one to love and know himself to truely love humanity. Having self-confidence is about building charisma, or personal-magnetism, it's about building good energy in yourself, at the core of your person. It dosen't mean that having confidence makes you think you can walk on water, it's much, much more humble than that. It is in fact entirely possible to be confident, have self-esteem, and still be humble even though they're words that tend to contradict eachother by definition.

Having confidence allows you to be rejected and not be scrarred emotionally: suppose you ask for a number and are rejected, your internal dialogue may go something like this "I know I'm a good person, and I'm deserving of good things... And it's too bad for her that she's more interested in men with adolescent behaviour problems, because I could have shown her a better time"... People without confidence tend to be defeatists, i.e. they're not willing to try to get more phone numbers if they've been hurt by rejection. Confidence is like a bullet proof vest for rejection, and having it allows you to move on.

I've been on both sides of the fence, I used to have very little confidence, and I've been working on my self-esteem for a long time. I've been taking dancing classes, attend Toastmasters events, working on my physical well-being, etc. Having it is definitely better than not.

Behavioral Feedback

[RunFatBoy.net]

What's interesting about devices that provide behavioral feedback is that unless the user isn't aware of the device, their own actions end up reacting not only to external environmental events, but to the feedback of the device itself.

So if the autistic user finds the device annoying, they may engage their eyes briefly to suppress the vibrating alaram. But that doesn't necessarily mean they are paying attention. Their concentration is then shifted to supressing the device.

I am wondering if this is something that would work best as an implant. The user could be trained from an early age that this feedback mechanism is an extension of themself.

Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ -- Exercise for Web 2.0

Re:Behavioral Feedback

[GigsVT]

It works fine if the person is committed to actually changing, but it's not going to force anyone to do anything, as you said they will just "game it" to make it shut up.

Sort like snapping a rubber band on your wrist every time you want to smoke. It's not going to prevent you from smoking, but it might help a few people.

Re:Behavioral Feedback

[nizo]

... this is something that would work best as an implant.

Make it give electric shocks and mandatory implantation for everyone and you have my full support. 90% of the people who bug me every day bore the hell out of me and would be screaming in no time, and since I never talk to anyone I would be safe, unless it detects me talking to myself when I am bored and starts shocking me?

Socially Challenged?

[robyannetta]

"Socially challenged"? You mean WoW players?

Re:Socially Challenged?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Socially challenged"? You mean everyone on the internet?

Re:Socially Challenged?

[Dr. Evil]

I'm offended by the term "Socially Challenged", I'm "Socially Inept"

Thank you.

Re:Socially Challenged?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are very funny - thanx for the laugh!

Re:Socially Challenged?

[Nebiros]

I found an intriguing piece of evidence while sniffing around in the MIT labs. I guess it's some kind of diagram depicting the whole thing working.

Help For The Socially Challenged...

[__aaclcg7560]

It's about time someone tried to help the typical Slashdotter stuck in his parent's basement. :P

Re:Help For The Socially Challenged...

[P3NIS_CLEAVER]

I don't care about the basement, but will I get laid????

Re:Help For The Socially Challenged...

[Enrique1218]

Yeah I personally put down 2 grand for it. God knows it can't be any worst than this Powerbook at meeting chicks

Re:Help For The Socially Challenged...

[__aaclcg7560]

If you want to meet chicks with a Powerbook, go hang out at a coffee shop. Now granted that all the chicks will have dyed black hair, black lipstick and nail polish, black leather clothes and white iPods.

Slashdot? Socially Challanged?

[Cr0w T. Trollbot]

For once, this really IS "news for nerds!"

- Crow T. Trollbot

Re:Slashdot? Socially Challanged?

[smccto]

Let me get this straight. If you don't have the skills to keep someone engaged in conversation, this thing vibrates. Hm. Haven't those devices already been sold for decades in adult stores?

Re:Slashdot? Socially Challanged?

[TheBogie]

Slashdotters everywhere will be checking their cell phones and beepers for the vibration. Bored people talking to slashdotters will be amused by this and no longer be bored. Maybe this is for slash dotters!

Re:Slashdot? Socially Challanged?

[pilgrim23]

can you imagine handing one of these to most professors and mandating they abide by it during those...yes THOSE lectures?

Boredom detector

[PainBot]

Hopefully I can get one for my boss

Re:Boredom detector

[shawb]

You really don't understand the management mentality. They will use it as a "not paying attention to what I am saying" device and try to use it to alter YOUR behavior, rather than their behavior like you intend.

I already have that

[Serveert]

It's my wife device.

Yeah, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

When will this product come (or not, as the case may be) in condom form??

My boss is socially challenged

[Timesprout]

So we have special key words we use so he knows when I am becoming bored or angry.

He will say something like

"We need to achieve synergy across our departmental endeavour so we can proactively engage any challenges the business may face"

I will then respond

"You are a fucking wanker"

Re:My boss is socially challenged

[Tackhead]

> So we have special key words we use so he knows when I am becoming bored or angry.
>
> He will say something like
> "We need to achieve synergy across our departmental endeavour so we can proactively engage any challenges the business may face"
>
> I will then respond
> "You are a fucking wanker"

Naaw. Just smile, nod, and shake your boss's hand.

If the wearer seems to be failing to engage his or her listener, the software makes the hand-held computer vibrate.

He'll get the message.

Re:My boss is socially challenged

[Anonymous Coward]

We just yell "Bingo!" randomly. Nowadays, our meetings are a lot shorter than they used to be.

Nice, but...

[SirBruce]

Hell, I'd like to get one of these devices for myself. But I have a feeling it would generate way too many false positives, or perhaps more importantly, inconsequential positives. The are times when people are bored, but they're trying to be polite and conversational, and pressuring them to make them more interested in what you're saying isn't going to help. Also, although this device may help an autistic person know the other person isn't engaged, do they even know what to do in order to facilitate engagement?

Bruce

Re:Nice, but...

[wondafucka]

Let's face it. The damned thing is going to be going off all the time unless people are feigning interest.

One of my friends does this funny thing when he's not paying attention. He breaks eye contact, starts rotating his head from side to side, scanning for something else to pay attention to. The kicker is he makes fart noises with his mouth when he does it. It's a little obvious. Funny, but obvious. I wonder if their device would pick that up.

Re:Nice, but...

[Ksisanth]

Perhaps it would be more useful as a training device in a therapeutic setting, especially for youngsters. If that's the key problem, that they simply don't recognize these social cues and can't therefore train their interactions with others around those cues, then having a device like that could help them to associate those cues properly and build their social repertoire as other children do. Older kids and adults ought to be able to use it in that way as well, by experiment, but people tend to be more tolerant of young kids doing that.

Re:Nice, but...

[smellsofbikes]

Much of an autistic person's challenge is recognizing emotions, or (apparently) more to the point, knowing what parts of a person's face to look at to recognize what the person is feeling. So, if you can tell a person "the person you're talking to is feeling very nervous" the person can do a memorized response to that situation, like running a macro. It's like an intelligent person who is blind, having a seeing eye dog that indicates when the walk light has turned on. Autistic people are not generally stupid people, they just physically cannot recognize the meaning of (or maybe even the existence of) emotional and nonliteral communication. And of course there's a broad continuum, from people that apparently don't recognize anything -- people, horses, chairs -- and essentially have no trustable input, to people who just talk a little too loudly and stand a little too close. ("He who laughs last, may be mildly autistic.") Oliver Sachs and particularly Tempel Grandin have written extensively about this. Tempel has said she thinks she hallucinates both sounds and visuals and even when she's pretty sure that what she sees is real, it's not useful. Someone else wrote about micro-tracking the eyes of people watching movies. During intense emotional scenes, most people would have their eyes jumping from one character's face (more particularly eyes and mouth) to the other, while an autistic person would look equally at the chair, the lightswitch, a character's knee.

I am beta testing this device...

[Mr. Flibble]

I am beta testing this device, it would work great except it keeps going off every time I visit slashdot....

Re:I am beta testing this device...

[misleb]

Then you should try to be more interesting so we don't get so bored by comments such as this.

Re:I am beta testing this device...

[Mr. Flibble]

That was exactly my point. I can elaborate on it with a 5000 word essay if you like.

This might make someone socially challenged

[ma11achy]

Attaching a small camera to the side of someone's glasses isn't
going to bode well for someone who is already socially challenged...

Re:This might make someone socially challenged

[aqfire]

Yeah, and what if I don't wear glasses?

bzzzzt!

[wuie]

I better be careful where I put that vibrating computer, or else I may find it quite... stimulating... to make people extremely bored and irritated.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to find someone to talk to about my level 60 character with maxed out leatherworking.

device to help socially challenged...

[Anonymous Coward]

aka "off switch"

Vibrate When Bored

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

"If the wearer seems to be failing to engage his or her listener, the software makes the hand-held computer vibrate."

I thought women already had access to such vibrating devices when they got bored, although I'm not sure their use was automatic...

Re:Vibrate When Bored

[Amouth]

I was thinking the same thing.. jsut wait till someone sticks it in there pants and is jsut constantly trying to make people bored...

Just what the world needs...

[bugnuts]

Reverse Beer Goggles!

Two Questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, wait.... Lemesee if I understand this. This device detects when people are bored with me and then vibrates!? I only have two questions:

1. Where can I get one?
2. Can I keep it in my front pocket?

It's PERFECT!

sweet jesus, it's an emotional clippy!

[smellsofbikes]

"I see you are talking to someone who is trying to be friendly. What would you like to do now?
* gently brush the person off?
* actively engage the person
* seduce the person?"

Re:sweet jesus, it's an emotional clippy!

[jandrese]

* Put it in

Re:sweet jesus, it's an emotional clippy!

[smellsofbikes]

Now *that* is a funny answer. That's exactly the sort of inappropriate response that typifies the type of geek where you know something's wrong when you talk to them, but you just don't know quite what.

Re:sweet jesus, it's an emotional clippy!

[Anonymous Coward]

You chose: * seduce the person.

To continue, please ensure none of the following features apply:

* sharp knees
* cankles
* ungroomed body hair
* a bored look

If, none apply, continue.

Emotion Detector

[digitaldc]

How long until bars start selling these in vending machines?

When we lift the covers from our feelings, we expose our insecure spots. Trust is just as rare as devotion, forgive us our cynical thoughts. If we need too much attention (not content with being cool) we must throw ourselves wide open and start acting like a fool. If we need too much approval, then the cuts can seem too cruel. (Neil Peart)

Re:Emotion Detector

[kin_korn_karn]

Oh great, lyrics from Neil's "Royal We" period.
Goddamn how I hated Power Windows and Hold Your Fire.

Re:Emotion Detector

[digitaldc]

lyrics from Neil's "Royal We" period.

Sorry it was the first thing I thought of lol

Even worse....

[briglass]

One problem I can foresee is that individuals with autistim spectrum disorders, as well as those without, are often in conversations where the other member is not oriented directly to them. For example, imagine a situation where the autistic individual was talking to the side of an uninterested acquaintence (who had turned away... due to uninterest). Also, I can only imagine the further humiliation of a person with autism, uncertain of his or her partner's mood state, and tries to stand directly in front of the person or turn the person towards them in order to "scan them" with a tiny camera attached to their face.

Re:Even worse....

[fbjon]

That's easy. If no face can be recognized, but the wearer is still talking, then the other person is really bored.

Re:Even worse....

[Dreamstalker_wolf]

*nod* Also, what would happen if the autistic-spectrum person (I have Asperger's, and have very few problems reading faces) is talking to someone who is honestly interested, but listening to two conversations at once? How would the device react then...

It would be much more humiliating, as autistic individuals needs "hands-on" training with trusted people to be able to interact "normally".

Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

[Peter Trepan]

Experts claim the "Microcomputer" will enable sufferers to hold down meaningful jobs while avoiding painful human interaction.

re: Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

[Churla]

So basically MIT has developed.. um.. Booze

Oh wait, that would be a mesication, would the device be shot glasses?

Re:Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

[Anonymous Coward]

you jest, but this is an important question. Before the microprocessor, what did losers do?

Re:Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

[Anonymous Coward]

They hung themselves from the tree above where the object of their desire was making out with the football star, leading to widespread "urban legends".

Check out the nerd buzzword quotient on this story

[ciaohound]

Autism, prosthetics, eyeglasses, vibrating computers? I think my cubemate must be reading this article, because he just went into cardiac arrest.

Austism isn't the problem.

[hackwrench]

Emotion is so depressed in society that there is lowered difference between bored and non bored. I'm sick and tired of being told to calm down by the stimulus intolerant.

Re:Austism isn't the problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut the fuck up, Donny.

Re:Austism isn't the problem.

[hackwrench]

Well at least you didn't tell me to calm down.

(To anonymous coward for those of you that reparent comments).

What?

[Monoliath]

I'd like to see some statistics on the accuracy of this device.

Sounds like a horrible idea, the subject matter is so incredibly subjective, and human emotions are so incredibly fickle, laced with an infinite and exponential number of variables that determine what anything 'means' from someone, to someone else.

Plus, does this help the autistic person learn more about people, or make them more dependent upon a machine?

In my mind, something like this only worsens autism because it prevents the individual from having to 'learn how to understand alien stimuli' by interpreting it for them.

I use to baby sit / care for one of my friends little brother, he was diagnosed with severe autism at an early age. Watching him grow older, in my eyes, he learned how to understand new things on his own (just sometimes it took a little longer than it does for most kids his age), like how the rest of us learn things (cause & effect / trial and error) it's not impossible for autistic individuals to perceive and comprehend this kind of stimuli, they just receive it on a different wavelength than we do, and in turn process it in a different manner.

A device like this isn't going to 'teach' anyone anything, it's simply a crutch that IMHO, will stifle development and learning.

As a side note, to me autism is a type of genius, that we just don't know how to comprehend as a society, this kid could do some of the most AMAZING things with number letter combinations / geometrical shapes I've ever seen.

Re:What?

[Inverted Intellect]

Watching him grow older, in my eyes, he learned how to understand new things on his own (just sometimes it took a little longer than it does for most kids his age), like how the rest of us learn things (cause & effect / trial and error) it's not impossible for autistic individuals to perceive and comprehend this kind of stimuli, they just receive it on a different wavelength than we do, and in turn process it in a different manner.

Well said. Neurotypicals essentially have a section (not neccassarily defined by a particular spot) of the brain dedicated to processing social stimuli. It's largely unconcious, so you won't have to think about it unless you want to. In us autistics (including those with Asperger's) that part of the brain is dysfunctional, essentially causing variably pronounced learning problems in that area (along with others).

This is why we largely have to think about social stimuli conciously. Most people don't even have to think about individual social cues in order to be influenced by them, it all comes automatically, registering either conciously or unconciously.

It has been found that if people like someone, they'll generally imitate their social cues (such as body language) without realizing it, and in turn be like more by the other person. Us autistics can't do that automatically. In hindsight, much of the unpleasant communication I've had in the past may have been because of something that was largely out of control of either me or the person I was talking with. I'm not sure I'd like to have the device mentioned in TFA. I'd probably benefit more from actually learning the social cues directly, even if the device might catch details that I won't.

Re:What?

[AK Marc]

In my mind, something like this only worsens autism because it prevents the individual from having to 'learn how to understand alien stimuli' by interpreting it for them.

Just like eye glasses make a person worse by changing how they see the world, rather than having them get used to the blury world they deserve to see.

As a side note, to me autism is a type of genius, that we just don't know how to comprehend as a society, this kid could do some of the most AMAZING things with number letter combinations / geometrical shapes I've ever seen.

Then you have no idea what autism is. There is a wide range, and you are thinking of autism as a very narrow subset of what is classified as autism. Most autistics are not any better at numbers/letters/shapes than most people. There are some specific cases of savants seen only in those with autism, but that doesn't mean that all, most, or even just more than a trivial number of autistic people will have such extraordinary abilities.

Re:What?

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>does this help the autistic person learn more about people, or make them more dependent upon a machine?

Every time the autistic person sees a particular facial contortion, a buzzer goes off. Will that help learning? Does the name "Pavlov" ring a bell?

Re:What?

[SlartibartfastJunior]

this device would reinforce what the person with autism sees anyway (facial cues) with a discrete signal saying "yes this means the person is getting bored." If anything, this should HELP people with autism learn to better distinguish cues on their own - they're being constantly reinforced.

I'm guessing that for most people, including those with autism, 90% of the people you interact with daily are people you've interact with frequently (barring jobs where you work with the public). So if your coworker had autism and used one of these devices, you would probably learn what facial cues you can use to make sure your coworker saw you were bored - now, you would probably just avoid talking with them if they didn't notice you were bored or uncomfortable. By making it easier for everyone else around the person with autism to interact with them, this device would also give them more chances to work on their visual cues and interaction because other people would be willing to hold more conversations with the autistic person.

Re:What?

[Monoliath]

Just like eye glasses make a person worse by changing how they see the world, rather than having them get used to the blury world they deserve to see.

There are eye exercises that increase vision quality over time with reference to certain types of vision problems. Your point is moot.

Then you have no idea what autism is. There is a wide range, and you are thinking of autism as a very narrow subset of what is classified as autism. Most autistics are not any better at numbers/letters/shapes than most people. There are some specific cases of savants seen only in those with autism, but that doesn't mean that all, most, or even just more than a trivial number of autistic people will have such extraordinary abilities.

I never said 'all autistics'. I only stated my opinion, which can only be based on my experience with the individual that I cared for. Sorry for the lack of clarification.

Re:What?

[Monoliath]

I thought the whole purpose of the buzzer even being utilized is because the autistic person doesn't notice / can not notice the facial expression...?

Re:What?

[gstoddart]

Sounds like a horrible idea, the subject matter is so incredibly subjective, and human emotions are so incredibly fickle, laced with an infinite and exponential number of variables that determine what anything 'means' from someone, to someone else.

And, it's probably very culturally biased. In some cultures (like Japanese) people simply do not outwardly show what they're really thinking. I can't imagine that for people who are inclined to be a little more circumspect about these things it would help much at all.

A device like this isn't going to 'teach' anyone anything, it's simply a crutch that IMHO, will stifle development and learning.

Well, I guess depending on how severe your affliction is, this can serve as a bit of feedback and aid in the development and learning to recognize those cues. It's not a cure-all, but it might actually help some people. I leave that for experts to figure out, since I'm hardly an expert on autism.

Like all science, come up with a hypothesis, test it, and see what happens.

Cheers

Re:What?

[iabervon]

It would depend on how the device is used. If someone uses it instead of trying to read expressions, they'll just become dependant on it. But if they try to anticipate what it's going to tell them, they can use it to learn. Autistic people in some living conditions are like people trying to learn a foreign language with flash cards who don't ever get to look at the answer side of the card, because people in their surroundings never explain their emotions, so they never find out any correct answers to learn.

Re:What?

[Ocho]

I'm not so sure about your statement that our emotions are so fickle and infinite and thus too complex to understand in any standard way. In his book Blink, Malcolm Gladwell describes some interesting research done to dissect our facial expressions into discrete classifications. It showed that once these expressions were put back together in the right combinations they could be easily qualified as certain emotions. It also shows that usually these expressions are very brief and usually made unintentionally. The team doing the research was able to develop a standard of facial regoins and expressions on those regions to use to catalog human emothins. He also describes how this research applies to autism. Interesting stuff when applied to people with autism or not.

Re:What?

[gstoddart]

I'm not so sure about your statement that our emotions are so fickle and infinite and thus too complex to understand in any standard way

I'm assuming you meant to respond to the grandparent post, because I didn't use the words fickle and infinite.

The borg...

[Tominva1045]

Social skills are irrelevant..

You too will be assimilated.

Separately, if a person can afford all this techno-junk he can also afford to go to Charm School volunteer himself to go on Dr. Phil.

new use being co-developed

[romrunning]

In related news, a new use for the same device is being co-developed that will help nerds realize the person they are talking to is getting bored. It will be triggered by the camera recognizing the "glazing-over" of the eyes, and then triggering a mild electrical shock. No longer will nerds be relegated to being typecast as socially-challenged with this amazing new device!

There's a solution to that!

[StefanJ]

Make the device look like a little anthropomorphic cricket that sits on the user's shoulder. Program it to whisper helpful hints:

"From the way they're starting to nod off, I suspect you may have talked for a little too long about your D&D character. Maybe you should stop."

"I could be wrong, but this guy doesn't look very interested in how parking meters are a form of statist Piracy. Maybe you should stop talking and let him finish filling out that ticket."

"From the way she's wrinkling her nose, I suspect she thinks you smell like cat pee. Maybe you should politely back out now and think about taking a shower."

Re:There's a solution to that!

[CharlesDonHall]

Make the device look like a little anthropomorphic cricket that sits on the user's shoulder. Program it to whisper helpful hints:

"From the way they're starting to nod off, I suspect you may have talked for a little too long about your D&D character. Maybe you should stop."

If we're using that design, I'd like to have *two* anthropomorpic crickets. The cricket on my other shoulder could say things like, "This person looks bored, but that's because they don't understand the subtleties of D&D and they've lost the point of your story. You need to go back to the beginning and explain everything in more detail."

Re:There's a solution to that!

[fbjon]

It could even go:

"The person in front of you seems to be bored stiff from your rants on the evils of DRM. Would you like to..?

• Write a letter to Sony Corp.
• Change subject to the glory of Open Source
• Learn more about boring people stiff

[ ] Don't whisper in my ear again you freak"

Re:There's a solution to that!

[dr_dank]

Make the device look like a little anthropomorphic cricket that sits on the user's shoulder. Program it to whisper helpful hints:

If you can extend this platform to cover other kinds of anti-social behavior, then you'd better make some room for that Nobel Prize. Helpful hints such as:

- I don't think the other children on the merry-go-round really want to see your penis.

- Supermarkets are not places that usually tolerate impromptu showtune performances.

- Did you remember to say please and thank you after punching that hobo?

Re:There's a solution to that!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like something Clippy the Paperclip would say

Re:There's a solution to that!

[Anonymous Coward]

you show your penis to children? what the hell is wrong with you?

This will backfire.

[torpor]

Give a socially inept person this sort of crutch, and their condition is only going to get worse:

"Sorry, left my U-Bore device at home, you guys are all going to have to put up with me today..."

"But, but .. my U-R-Dick-Alarm 5000 batteries have been dead for the last half hour, of course I would still respect you in the morning .. anyway .. about that time I configured a Unix box from across town .. you see .. blah blah blah .."

"Wait, wait, I can't tell if you're bored or not. Stare into the duct-tape on the side of my goggles, if you please, for 5 minutes while I get a reading .."

Sorry, but this is pitiful Borg'ism taking over society, under the guise of "phony mental health problem #12402 help" .. what a load of crap.

Re:This will backfire.

[Aranth Brainfire]

Well, if it's such a "phone mental health problem" then you've obviously never met someone with Autism or Asperger's. (Which suggests a possible social problem in your case...)

This isn't for regular people who just suck. This is for people who have an actual problem with determining emotions from cues, which is about as phony of a problem as a broken bone.

The did already...

[Mad Ogre]

It's called the Internet.

The Socially Challenged?

[Anonymous Coward]

Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged
You mean like the French?

Re:The Socially Challenged?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean like the French? No, they're working on a simular device for the French which optically recognizes somebody approaching in a uniform and then automatically pops up a white flag. As soon as they can get it to stop waving flags at doormen and theatre ushers, they'll begin joint testing with the French military.

Anybody remember?

[grasshoppa]

Anybody remember Not Necessarily the News? Remember the one with the device that detects when you start falling asleep and beeps? As I recall, they closed the show with the then president ( Regan ) making a speech, with an audio overlay of the beeps of many journalists falling asleep.

I think this is an amazing device ( if works as advertised, which is unlikely ) that the people who should be wearing it won't wear.

Re:Anybody remember?

[Superfreaker]

Whoa! Not Necessarily the News! Haven't heard that in a while. Gonna have to google it to remember wth it actually was.

But, but...

[N7DR]

...this seems to solve exactly the inverse problem to the one I see.

In an interaction between an autistic person and a "normal" person, what I see is that it's the autistic (and/or emotionally challenged) person who gets bored and simply walks away, with little or no prior warning. I have seen this happen too many times to count. I don't think I've ever seen the "normal" person be the one to react by becoming bored; usually simply trying to comprehend what the other person is saying/doing is enough to keep them engaged.

Re:But, but...

[Reziac]

A contrariness common in SF fandom: Someone with no ability to recognise when they're boring their audience rattles on ad tedium about their current interest; the listener, normal or not, may suddenly turn and leave without a word.

This abandon-the-conversation thing is so common that it's ordinary behaviour, not considered rude or unusual -- probably developed because otherwise you may be trapped for hours by endless exposition on some topic of absolutely no interest to you. I've found myself doing it, almost as a reflex. (And no, I'm not autistic).

Needs work

[Anonymous Coward]

Get back to me when it can recognize which chick at the singles bar is the most horny and desperate, please.

Ramifications

[Chris Johnson]

The question becomes, why make the user aware of this additional information?

Expectation is that the user will apparently go, "OH! I may be boring you with my account of the history of left handed widgets! All of a sudden I don't want to finish my thought, and it mysteriously no longer matters that I haven't given you the gift of the entire intellectual structure, neatly composed with no details left out, so you can wholly share this idea that I think is the coolest thing!" ...

I have an alternate suggestion. We should make these things so that instead of actuating a vibrating motor, the alert thing operates a small robot arm attached to a light, non damaging foam bat. When the person shows signs of boredom, the robot arm actuates the bat and whacks the listener upside the head, curing their lapse of attention and saving me the trouble. :D

Surely this is a much more sensible approach, given that boredom is neither a virtue or considered to be a social advantage? We can teach those socially disadvantaged NTs to be socially polite even when the conversation ranges beyond 'kiddy pool' levels.

(Disclaimer- yes, I have Aspergers, and yes, I am joking... I think ;) should I be?)

Re:Ramifications

[mooingyak]

I got a little ways through your post, but then I stopped paying attention because I was bored.

singularities

[Anonymous Coward]

So what if two autistic people meet? There may be now way out of the loop.

What if the wearer is looking in the mirror?

A low-tech approach

[leob]

Wouldn't it be easier to wear a T-shirt that says:

"If you're bored, just say so! Don't make faces at me!"

Re:The TRUTH will set you free

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess if you put it that way it does sound a bit bad.
But look on the bright side. You know way too many details to just be a casual troller.

low EQ

[b4stard]

Nah, he's thinking of the EverQuest players.

As one who has Asperger's,

[Odocoileus]

It might be nice to know when I am losing someone's interest, but, as an Aspie, I really don't have much to say to NT's anyway. I mean if I could hold conversations that interest a NT I wouldn't need the device in the first place. The reality, however, is that conversations that seem to intrigue NT's hold no interest for me. And for some reason I do not get, NT's do not like to talk about the same couple of topics incessantly. I have learned to do the obligatory greetings, but they are best kept short. Anything else is either about business, which has a finite set of interactions (I am fine within my knowledge base), or involves friends that have similar interests. I know some aspies want better communications with the NT world, but knowing when the person is bored would, at least for me, be worse because I still wouldn't know what words to speak to make it better. I guess in the long run maybe, after performing some statistical analysis concerning what words make a person bored. But then again, I pretty much already know that people do not want to talk about scifi or computers or world domination, so it is back to square one.

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[Dr. Evil]

There are plenty of people who take up interests specifically to fit into social groups. Golf is a prime example. The same fits for pro-sport-franchises and music. Some people get in there just so that they'll be able to hold a conversation with people they find boring.

If you're not in sales, there's probably no reason to subject yourself to the horror.

What's with categorizing people into syndromes anyway? NT?

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[Anonymous Coward]

People DO want to talk about scifi or computers or world domination.
Educated sheep i am forced to deal with on a daily basis go not.

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[Anonymous Coward]

>What's with categorizing people into syndromes anyway? NT?

NT - Neurotypical, that is, not having any syndrome. Most syndromes are just shorthands for extreme personality types, in which case NT means falling somewhere near the norm and/or average for a given society.

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[kindbud]

I know some aspies want better communications with the NT world, but knowing when the person is bored would, at least for me, be worse because I still wouldn't know what words to speak to make it better.

Usually you don't need to say anything, but just politely end the conversation for now.

"I see you're busy, let's talk about this some other time."

If a person is bored, there really isn't anything you can say at the time to make it better. Maybe they are in a bad mood. Maybe their mind is preoccupied with something else. Who knows? Very skilled social persons sometimes are able to change a person's mood with words, but that's best left to professionals like comedians and psychologists. :)

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite confusing when contrasted to the Kiersey use of "NT", a psychological group that seems to share many aspects of Aspergerdom, if not overlapping entirely.

Re:As one who has Asperger's,

[Anonymous Coward]

But then again, I pretty much already know that people do not want to talk about scifi or computers or world domination

Let me introduce you to this thing called the internet.... ;) Seriously though, as an NT, I actually do like to talk about these things, but because like you I feel that nobody else does, I just don't bring them up. Unfortunately many NTs are caught up in worrying about what's "cool" or not. Of course that's not always the case.

Easier

[Britz]

Wouldn't it be easier for the autistic person (given that they actually can engange and talk to people so much that those could become bored) to simply train how to recoginze different facial expressions? Don't flame me please, I know it ain't easy and maybe for some it can't be done. I simply think if an autistic person that is able to engage people on their own might want to try and learn facial expressions using different means. Like we don't naturally know how a dog feels. But if we learn that tail wagging means they are happy we can recognize it. IMHO with a little training many autistic people with the ability to engage people and use a device that vibrates might be as capable as a computer to recognize emotion such as boredom.

Heck, I could use a little training, too.

Re:Easier

[geoffspear]

Yes. It would be a lot easier for the autistic person if they could just cure their autism. You're a genius.

Re:Easier

[whitehatlurker]

Sorry, I thought this would be the thread where they ask if it would be easier to identify people who aren't bored when I talk to them.

I'll be going, you can wake up now.

Re:Easier

[Britz]

I now remember that I saw a tv documentary in which they did exactly that. They tried to train autistic teenagers to recognize basic emotions. Like extreme anger. The degree to which they can't relate varies, as far as I understood it. They had a successful example. Not hugely successful, but at least when the parent started to cry the teenager learned that this is a sign of stress and they should try to comfort them. The teenager still was bad at expressing emotions, but at least could respond to emotions in a basic way.

If you do not learn a foreign language, but just memorize a phrase that does not make sense to you at all but it gets you something. Quite hard to explain.

Will this device work for Borat?

[dildo]

"Hello. Would you like to touch my krumm?"

I think that if it didn't scream itself into a short circuit on watching this Ali G skit, it should get some reprogramming.

zerg

[Lord Omlette]

When can I buy one?

Cameras on glasses? Hmm....

[Kelson]

Not that the resolution needs to be terribly high for this particular use, but if they can make a decent camera small enough to put on a pair of glasses (as in Transmetropolitan) it could be incredibly convenient for the casual photographer.

Of course, there would be privacy implications that would have to be worked out. One solution might be the one I hear has been implemented in Japan for camera phones. As I understand it, Japan requires camera phones to make an audible, recognizable noise when they take a picture -- the idea being that you can't take pictures surreptitiously if the subject knows you're doing it.

Oh, thank God!

[jrussel21]

Egads! This is just in time to save my marriage!

Speaking of socially challenged...

[Homestar Breadmaker]

Would you mind telling us what "engage their eyes" is supposed to mean? They just tell the little enson crusher in their head to engage and suddenly the person they are talking to stops being bored?

Also, "web 2.0" is a meaningless buzzword for marketing douches and retards. I'm wishing cancer upon you.

What are you going to do today Napoleon?

[szembek]

Whatever I feel like gosh!

How's this help?

[Homestar Breadmaker]

So now someone with autism knows they are boring people, and has a gadget reminding them of the fact. Is this going to help them interact with people better, or just make them feel pressured to try to be interesting when they don't really know how to be interesting, thus making them flustered, overwhelmed, and feel like withdrawing?

No no, you're thinking of 'The Sims'

[Anonymous Coward]

* Start a catfight?

Re:No no, you're thinking of 'The Sims'

[smellsofbikes]

I didn't realize there was a "The Sims: Paris Hilton Edition" out already. Does it include blurry sex scenes, too?

Not About Memory

[neoshroom]

It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning.

The issue isn't memory, its recognition. Those suffering from autism may not be able to connect to the people around them on a more emotional level, however vibration like from a ringtone is a que to stop doing whatever it is you are doing. It makes perfect sense that someone could not recognize the emotional state of another, but could easily recognize the vibration of a mobile device.

Humor dector

[pmike_bauer]

So, we have some geek wearing oakly "thump" sized glasses (camera included) with a wire running down to a belt-mounted computer for the express purpose of detecting emotion.

The main emotion this thing is going to detect is amusement.

But what of nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

It will alert its autistic user if the person they are talking to starts showing signs of getting bored or annoyed.

We nerds know when someone we're talking to are bored or annoyed - if we're talking about tech or especially science, the non-nerds are bored and annoyed.

I think this is about the Asperger's syndrome...

[Spy der Mann]

you know, people psychologically UNABLE to recognize other people's emotions.

False positives...

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to break it to you. You're a geek, those aren't false positives. Nope, they're not inconsequential, you're a geek, you just think they're inconsequential. I'd read the rest of your post, but, as you might have noticed, your device is going off.

The Device

[neoshroom]

As you can see from the picture next to the posting, the device looks remarkably like a spoon.

I wanted the big thumbs-up from Poppy...

[Anonymous Coward]

*device bleeps*
"he just gave you the nostril flare of total rejection"

Buzzz Buzzz Buzzz

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that your 'emotional social intelligence prosthetic' device is making a noise.

Formatting your text in brief paragraphs may help.

Re:Buzzz Buzzz Buzzz

[Odocoileus]

OK I have the short version:

"so did you see stargate last night?"

buzz

crap I'm losing him

"they say BSG is one of the best show on tv"

buzz buzz

ok, shows are out

"man, the new gnome is nice"

buzz buzz buzz

crap, crap crap

"have you heard of a place called aspergia?"

buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

ah forget it

Oh no...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was expecting an article about ThinkGeek releasing some sort of rubber doll girlfriend.

Shocking

[chromozone]

I think more devices like this and others are coming out of the woodwork because psychiatric organizations, big pharma and government facilitators have lost credibility. Pharmaceutical "treatments" for psychological problems have never worked as advertised, and the cat is well out-of-the-bag. The new trend is now "devices".

Even the brain imaging techniques hyped over the last years are being called into question ( "Can Brian Scans See Depression" from the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/18/health/psycholog y/18imag.html?ex=1143867600&en=9d110b78060d7e34&ei =5070 )

Now in the last few months we have had news about "vagus nerve stimulators" to shock people suffering depression (Washington Post)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/03/20/AR2006032001192.html

Then there was also the new GED device(Graduated Electronic Decelerator) which is a new FDA approved device used for "aversion therapy" used to shock retarded people and individuals who can't "control" aggressive or self injurious behaviors (New York Newsday) http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-li shok194670358mar21,0,7313668.story?coll=ny-linews- headlines

I think as the pharmaceutical modality continues to get exposed for the sham it is, there will be more "devices" coming down the pike. I expect they will be described as useful for some "extreme" condition such as retardation, autism etc. but then they will be shown "to have promise" for an expanding group of victims. Most "news" about psychology these days is just marketing.

The "mental health" field is a mess and many of its administrators are not to be trusted.

Keep in mind all this is in addition to what in the US we call The New Freedom Initiative" that allows for programs like Teen Screen; a so-called suicide prevention program concocted at Columbia University. To get all their federal funding schools will have to screen kids (even preteens despite the name)for suicidal tendencies via a short list of questions. Being depressed for more than 2 weeks is one sign and one of the signs of depression is not liking school (if you can imagine that).

Of course the drug companies lobbied for this, and the corrupt and psycho-politically motivated psychiatric associations are in full support. Sadly the Bush administration is also behind this and its based on a program from Texas. Of course there is little in the media about all this.

The bats are trully in the belfry and it is the inmates running the asylum and I feel bad for kids who have to grow up under this sort of crap.

Re:Shocking

[geoffspear]

You're really taking your diagnosis of paranoid schizophenia a bit harshly, aren't you?

NOTE: I'm not part of the conspiracy against you. I promise.

Re:Shocking

[chromozone]

I love when pseudo intellectuals identify with the problem and after taking offense at detection capitulate via sophomoric sarcasm.

While I am at it, paranoid schizophrenia happens as a person falls away from their own innocence and identity. Their own conscience looms up inside them as they fall away from themselves. Since pride and denial keep people fixed away from realizing their own flaws and errors they fixate to outer things - even as they become phantoms. Of course at this point people can also hear voices as they descend into their darker nature and become receptive.

That said, paranoid schizophrenia is curable in a few weeks once people see the source of the problem.

A usual cause of PS is a weak father and manipulative (domineering, willful etc. Mother). Kids get their own identities over-shadowed and have to grow into Mamma's by default. Homosexuality in men can be caused in a similar fashion. They get bonded all wrong. Its quite simple actually. People dont see it because once they fall inside themselves they lose intuition and have to compensate with lopsided egos. That also causes lust to arise, and is why so many pseudo intellectuals are addicted to porn and pervy things. One thing just telescopes from another when ego and pride come to dominate the psyche and soul's awareness diminishes.

Scoffers are good at trying to play "gotcha" but have have no real paradigm for causes themselves.

I am not a Scientologist. My cult is www.fhu.com (Foundation Of Human Understanding). There is no way to join but you can try.

Moving in the wrong direction?

[Guppy06]

"It will alert its autistic user if the person they are talking to starts showing signs of getting bored or annoyed."

I'm certainly not autistic, more "socially awkward" than "socially challeneged," but my personal experience is that I tend to get a lot of false positives in the "bored or annoyed" category.

dating?

[DaFallus]

Sounds like the perfect dating tool to me... especially for the /. crowd.

Emotion detector? I already have one of these...

[rubberbando]

Its called a mood ring!

Mod Parent Down!!!

[gurutc]

Autism isn't funny, yet is funnier than parent post.

Fun party game

[Doc_NH]

Imagine the fun at cocktail parties if it was on a shock collar.

bore: So Buffy and I hopped into the Volvo to head to our vacation home when {BZAAAAP}{ARRRRRG}
crowd: :)

Person with Autism

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing to remember in all of this is to refer to a person with autism as: "Person with autism", NOT "Autistic person". Using the first example just modifies the person, they are a person and they also have autism. The second defines the person by their issue, basically obliterating the person.

Re:Person with Autism

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the worst kind of politically correct bullshit dude.

When I'm hungry you can just go ahead and call me a hungry motherfucker, not a motherfucker with hunger.

Re:Person with Autism

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen to that

You are exactly right

[gurutc]

The only way to function with Aspergers is to consciouly learn to read expressions. It is a power tool if you choose to use it that way. But it is the dark side because it keeps you from having real interaction and backfires completely when you tire. And it is a hell of a lot of work. Aspergers sucks

Re:You are exactly right

[cr0sh]

I agree with you on all your points. The real power of Asperger's comes in understanding that in all likelyhood, the human brain is nothing more than a very advanced pattern recognition and playback device. The best argument and discussion of this can be found in the book On Intelligence, by Jeff Hawkins.

After much reading of liturature in various fields of artificial intelligence, emergence, chaos theory, network theory, psychology, etc - I have come to believe that recognizing this is paramount to understanding how the human mind works (as well as how it doesn't). Those with Asperger's and others on the autistic spectrum can use this knowledge, along with reason and logic, to almost scary benefit to themselves, if they so choose.

In a way, proper use of this knowledge is directly akin to application of the ideas inherent in NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming). In essence, since you, as a non-NT individual, may need to be able to conciously "see" (and learn to understand) others emotions, as well as conciously "playback" similar emotions based on other cues - you have at hand a very useful tool to control other people, if you can understand and master it. Because those patterns you playback will cause the other individuals or group to recognize (in an unconscious manner, for most) the pattern, and play back others. What we think of as "free will" is not so much randomness in what we think we are doing, but pattern recognition and playback of patterns in a network of complex emergent social interactions in an environment of (mathematical) chaos. Non-NT individuals are among the only ones in a group who can use this knowledge to their advantage. In NLP training (which is something which seeks to train non-NT individuals to recognize what an NT individual already has practice with), the goal is recognize these body, facial, and verbal cues of others, and to utilize your own, in a manner to direct and control the responses of other people.

Done right, what can be accomplished seems amazing. With enough practice, you can almost get people to do things for you that they themselves wouldn't ordinarily do, and they do them willingly! Mind control? Jedi-like power?

Not at all - you are simply using the pattern recognition and playback capabilities within the mind of a human organism(s) in a manner concious to yourself. Hacking others brains, emotions, and desires, if you will. Some might call that unethical. Why is it ok if everyone (NTs) already do it unconsciously, but not if you (a non-NT) do it consciously? In the end, it doesn't matter, because they can't really control it (unless they are non-NT as well, and recognize what you are doing).

Your wish is their command...

Re:You are exactly right

[zentinal]

Can you define "NT" versus "non-NT"? I haven't heard the terms before.

Re:You are exactly right

[wtansill]

Do a GOOGLE search on "Meyers-Briggs" testing.

Re:You are exactly right

[bnenning]

Can you define "NT" versus "non-NT"?

I believe in this context NT is "neurotypical", meaning not Aspergers/autistic.

Re:You are exactly right

[Anonymous Coward]

Institute for the study of the Neurologically Typical

Re:You are exactly right

[rookworm]

It seems highly unlikely that this sort of attempted manipulation would not be immediately found out, or at least be unsuccessful, unless the disabled individual was _really_ good at aping normal mannerisms. In this case, the diagnosis would probably be closer to `sociopath' than `autistic'.

Re:You are exactly right

[Anonymous Coward]

Unconsciously displaying how you feel is either automatic or hard. Choosing to display something else is basically acting, which is just another learnable skill.

Re:You are exactly right

[Anonymous Coward]

you're so far from the truth it's ridiculous.
I press play/rewind on people all the time. You see, if they were conscious of their patterns then they wouldn't exhibit them. It's like people's achilles heel. And it's damn easy to spot the less engrossed with your own reality you are.

I've pondered the ethics question all the time, since those who are unaware of their actions are constantly imposing/limiting reality of others. Does consciousness then become the point where we become responsible for our actions?

Re:You are exactly right

[cr0sh]

You would really be surprised how easy it is to get people to "do certain things" in a repetitious fashion, or even to "loop" them (typical results of such "looping" are either extreme depression, a "nervous breakdown", or in extreme cases, suicide). Hell, marketing is a form of this stimulous, whose goal is to get you to "buy more".

Marketing is but one "do certain thing" - there are many others in the human animal. Most are "herd instincts", learned and patterned on from young ages. Since non-NT individuals are less susceptible to this patterning, such triggers don't have an effect (or not the same level of effect). Non-NT individuals can see this, know about it, and can apply it. It is a very powerful tool, and can be used for both good and bad (just like any tool). NT individuals can learn to use and recognize it, too. In fact, many have, and many continue to do so (hence, NLP training). However, it is more difficult for them, simply because sometimes, they have to overcome the very same patterns in themselves that they are trying to control in others.

It is also possible (but very, very difficult, unless you can map out the social nodal structure either in your head or another way) to cause others to perform patterns (as noted previously), to get them to interact with one another to cause them to trigger other patterns (and in theory, you can get looping here, too), to a final outcome. Group control to achieve desired ends, in which the nodes are unaware of the final output...

Re:You are exactly right

[rookworm]

Sounds interesting. Please provide examples/ links.

Patent Lawsuit "Rumbling"

[Dareth]

Uh oh, I feel a Patent Lawsuit coming on!...

Immersion Corporation don't let anyone vibrate without first paying the piper!

Just ask Sony about that!See Legal section.

Re:Patent Lawsuit "Rumbling"

[Anonymous Coward]

If an earthquake damages my house, I'll be suing Immersion Corporation for the damages. After all, it must have been a registered user of their patent that caused the damage.

Already exists

[gr8_phk]

See Ken Perlins page (yes, the Perlin noise guy) and check out the face applet. At the bottom there is a link to a story how it can help autistic children learn how to interpret peoples facial expressions. Best of all it's free.

Obligatory related news..

[packetmill]

Later,millions of nerds around the globe lose their jobs due to an obscure bug that, among other anomalies, confuses acute disgust with seductive looks. Sexual harassment cases flood courtrooms in north america and europe, and IT bosses are even reported to have filed charges of rape....

Chairs

[ArsenneLupin]

people that apparently don't recognize anything -- people, horses, chairs

Yeah, they are a very subtle social clue meaning that your manager does not really appreciate you jumping ship... especially if they are flying low...

Just a thought

[winphreak]

Don't dating sims do the same? Oh wait...

Ob 24 Reference

[rlp]

Expect to see Chloe using one of these in Season 6. :~)

Re:Ob 24 Reference

[bnenning]

Nah. Chloe doesn't care what anybody else thinks, and besides most people who attempt to talk to her quickly realize that's a bad idea.

I really hope she gets to avenge Edgar...

Great...

[tfcdesign]

Now we are going to freakout the autistic and then people will REALLY feel comfortable around them.

Duh!

[ChrisGilliard]

Device Developed To Help Socially Challenged

It's called a computer.

Damnit!

[BumpyCarrot]

Not a robot girlfriend for geeks then?

But how well does this device read Autistic people

[DrScotsman]

I too have Asperger's syndrome, and personally I think I'm fairly OK at reading people's expressions when I'm thinking about it or when they're very obvious (far too many false positives though). However when it comes to reading other Autistics, I can never tell, and neurotypicals can't seem to tell either.

Whenever I'm on the schoolbus and I'm abnormally quiet, people seem to think I'm either upset or pissed off about something, when normally I'm just tired.

And let's not forget eye contact. I presume the device might register that, but an Autistic person not making eye contact indicates no more than intimidation, and sometimes it's even negligible.

I know the device is made for reading neurotypicals, and it'd be very difficult for it to differentiate between the two, but still.

Nice Mr. M0 immune

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell it to the bipolar diagnosis.

Give Politicians, managers, speakers one

[ebvwfbw]

I can think of a number of politicians that need this device. Just think of the time it could save us all. Stupid idiot in a meeting boaring us all ... vibrate. Wonder if they have a clue device - a device that can radio to the boared device and let it know your already boared. Of course with some people it may simply make them mad.

I thought it was targetting slashdot users!

[bgalbrecht]

Maybe next time...

Re:I thought it was targetting slashdot users!

[Delight-Delirium]

We've already got comment scores ;o)

Boredom = Autism???

[boyfaceddog]

Let me get this straight. If I am bored by someone, it isn't because the topic is boring or becasue I have a short attention span, its because there is something fundamentaly wrong with the brain of the person speaking to me.

Wow, college makes SOOOO much more sense now.

Re:But how well does this device read Autistic peo

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever I'm on the schoolbus and I'm abnormally quiet, people seem to think I'm either upset or pissed off about something, when normally I'm just tired.

Woah, woah, woah. Are you telling me that people take silence as an indicator of a bad mood?

Why didn't anyone tell me?! I'm neurotypical, btw.

Oh great.

[C10H14N2]

A vibrator activated by boredom. Wonderful.

Now hordes of autistics are going to be running around DELIBERATELY boring people to tears.

Someone alert Rockstar. There's a highly offensive FPS in here, I'm sure of it.

autistic pride

[AutisticGirl]

I'm involved with the autistic pride movement and I don't think this device is going to benefit autistics. It seems more like it's being designed to save regular people having to be tolerant. If you haven't heard of autistic pride or think it doesn't exist have a look at http://www.autisticprideday.com./

My improvement!

[raddan]

Instead, hook up this device to electrodes in the audience. Instant attention! This would work wonders in high school algebra classes! Who cares if I know someone's bored-- let's eliminate boredom altogether!

You, sir, are an asshole.

[loqi]

You didn't even have to RTFA to see that this is intended for autistics. It's like saying, "These wheelchairs are just a crutch for inept people that can't walk".

Fuck you, torpor. And if you think autism is a "phony mental health problem", then double fuck you.

Re:You, sir, are an asshole.

[torpor]

its a money-maker, dude. they don't have these so-called clinically-proven problems in other societies and cultures.. nor is someone going to profit from it, if they do.

its a sick world. poor us.

I'd keep the computer in my pants

[Anonymous Coward]

and try to bore people all the time.

Great....

[$1uck]

Now girls will be compelled to bore you with meaningless conversation. oh-wait this is slashdot must make retarded qualifier here about nerds and girls.

april 1

[flok]

Just a couple of days too soon...

I was going to give this device a try

[blueZ3]

to see if.... Oh, sparkley!

MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Design

[SimHacker]

Rosalind W. Picard, one of Media Lab's prominent research scientists, is regularly cited as a supporter of intelligent design. The New York Times writes about the Anti-Evolution Petition that "advocates who have pushed to dilute its teaching have regularly pointed to a petition signed by 514 scientists and engineers", including " Rosalind W. Picard , director of the affective computing research group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology".

Can Rosalind Picard please explain how teaching Intelligent Design is good for the educational system? Is she hoping to secure a big fat grant for her Affective Computing Research Group from the Discovery Institute?

Wikipedia's Discovery Institute says:

The Templeton Foundation, who provided grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, later asked intelligent design proponents to submit proposals for actual research, "They never came in," said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned. "From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.

The MIT Media Lab is often criticised for being more interested in securing corporate funding than having any scientific rigor and or intellectual seriousness. If Rosalind Picard is such a rigorous scientist who supports Intelligent Design, then why doesn't she submit a proposal to the Discovery Institute to do some actual research to prove her irrational beliefs?

Knock Knock.
Who's there?
Intelligent Designer.
Intelligent Designer who?
God.

-Don

Practical Uses

[rea1l1]

1)Highschool teachers should be required to use this.

2)Hope that autistic person doesn't confuse his cell phone with this thing or the listener might think he has ADHD too.

I don't think you have Apsberger's

[Anonymous Coward]

you're probably just a pompous ass.

Re:I don't think you have Apsberger's

[Krach42]

A.) It's Asperger's.
B.) You totally don't know about Aspergers, and you're likely a Neurotypical (NT). Which means you're going to mistake typical Asperger behavior for being socially inappropriate.

Please, be aware that he had no intentions of coming across to you as a pompous ass. He is however socially challenged though (Asperger's is in the Autism spectrum). And Aspies and Austics just can't perceive how you're going to interpret what they write.

If they're being honest and blunt, you're likely going to call them a pompous ass. See, if he had some sort of device to buzz him and tell him that people are going to take his words as if he were a pompous ass, he'd be able to avoid doing so. But until such time as a social prostetic is available for slashdot, you're just going to have to deal with people whom you perceive as pompous asses.

Re:I don't think you have Apsberger's

[lampiaio]

you're probably just a pompous ass.

From Wikipedia: People with Asperger syndrome often are noted for having a highly pedantic way of speaking

On The Other Shoe...

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

I haven't got Aspergers, just a chronic case of "The Knack".

My default method is just to simply assume that everyone around me will be bored, lost and disinterested the moment I open my mouth about something technical or science oriented.

You can get a feel for how your listeners react to you by simply asking one of them about sports, sitcoms or celebrities. You'll immediately be bored, stay bored, become increasing lost and disinterested, finally bordering on supressing screaming at this person please shut up.

It's a great way to really get the feel for how non geeks react to you!

ObJoke

[Anonymous Coward]

If the wearer seems to be failing to engage his or her listener, the software makes the hand-held computer vibrate.

Ignore me, baby! Ignore me!

And then what?...

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

So, the device vibrates. Now alerted to the fact that they are boring and/or annoying their audience, what do they do now?

"Smoothly wrap up the conversation and move on" strikes me as the sort of social talent that people who need this device aren't likely to have.

("So I thought it was really COOL that if pv=nRT then therefore [buzz, buzz] DAMMIT THIS IS *TOO* INTERESTING!!!!")

So.....

[Anonymous Coward]

How long before we get the model to help pick up chiks?

Yeah, ...

[Anonymous Coward]

...they call it a gun!

Some tricks I use

[Tipa]

I have two things I do:

One is, stop talking after a couple of minutes, no matter what.

Second is, try to remember what it is the person wanted to know before I started talking to them about whatever I was thinking about when they started talking.

That's a tough one for me. I have to go back and try to remember why they are there. I need a lot more time to shift gears than people are generally willing to allow.

Uh, what?

[loqi]

Wow, what to say? I've known people with these disorders. You're seriously out of touch with reality.

Or, more likely, a troll. Poor you, either way.

Re:Uh, what?

[torpor]

Fuck you. Its called an opinion. What are you, a fascist?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

>>>its a money-maker, dude. they don't have these so-called clinically-proven problems in other societies and cultures.. nor is someone going to profit from it, if they do.

>Fuck you. Its called an opinion. What are you, a fascist?

Opinions are about something that does not have a "true answer". It's not my opinion that 1+1=2, but I can believe/disbelieve that. It is my opinion that you messed up.

If it is a belief please declare it as such. As it stands, it's a statement of fact. So don't be surprised if we take it as one. Advice to be careful with your language, like declaring belief/opinion (I think...), applies especially when there are Aspies around.

Oh, and... your facts (that's how they were declared, after all) were incorrect.

Google define:So-called acting or being something in name only, but not in reality; alleged(a): doubtful or suspect
It is real.

"don't have ... in other societies and cultures"
Oh yeah? Maybe they haven't gotten far in diagnosing it. Someone stated that in Japan people don't show their emotions on their faces to begin with. Presuming that is true, (usually it's a matter of it being different or far smaller) the big problems of Aspergers applies to everyone, and is therefore not out of the ordinary; and would mean a lot of (still real) cases that would be diagnosed here may not be there. This would not be because they don't have it. And just because you haven't heard of it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

no

[weierstrass]

NT doesn't refer to (part of) the myers-briggs typology

it stands for 'neuro-typical', a term 'autistic spectrum' individuals use to refer to people who are not on the autistic spectrum.

Re:MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Desi

[bnenning]

That "anti-evolution" statement is basically meaningless. Here's what it says:

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Note that it does not say that evolution didn't happen, or that the complexity of life requires an active designer. Equating agreement with that statement to support for intelligent design is fundamentally dishonest, and thus exactly what we should expect from neo-creationists.

Ambiguity

[teklob]

As anyone who has ever ingested hallucinogenic mushrooms will know...

Autism, Other Minds, and Religion

[Pfhorrest]

The autistic individual tends to treat everything as an object, and they can recognize form and substance, but not emotionality. However, they can learn it, given enough conditioning and reinforcement, albeit it is very artificial and prone to error if certain situations occur which were not anticipated.

As someone who is naturally very autistic but has learned to understand the neurotypical mindset, I can tell you that this is dead-on.

The big difference between a neurotypical and an autistic mindset is that autistics see everything literally, as it is, and do not like to jump to conclusions based on insufficient data. (Though we are often very good at pattern recognition and educated guessing, we recognize that these are guesses and don't mistake them for facts). This quickly gives rise to the typical 'defining characteristic' of an autistic personality in not recognizing others' emotional states, because *there is no direct evidence that people other than the observer feel anything*. An individual's only experience of "inner experiences" is their own, and it is by definition impossible to experience another's inner experiences. To the procedurally-oriented autistic mind, this leads to the conclusion that there's no reason to suspect that such "other people's inner experiences" exist. It's an alien concept to the autistic.

To the neurotypical, certain behaviors exhibited by other people resemble their own behaviors which are triggered, it seems, by "emotions" or "inner experiences", and so the neurotypical jumps to the conclusion that other people have such inner experiences - that there is some "self" or "I" or "ego" or "soul" that is feeling and thinking in there, and not just a bunch of matter that behaves in certain complex ways. I believe this also explains why severely neurotypical people are so prone to religious beliefs in God or gods - if you're already making the jump to ascribe agency (a necessarily undetectable quality) to certain objects we call "people", why not ascribe such agency to other objects or phenomena, or the universe as a whole?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is a bad thing to do. In fact it's something that borderline autistic cases like your typical geek are often very comfortable with - the anthropomorphization of computer programs that don't "like" each other, or which "fight" over certain resources, or which "talk" to one another. Geeks understand that these aren't literally true descriptions, inasmuch as we are not ascribing inner experience to these programs, but they are very useful, convenient, and accurate shorthand for describing their behaviors. It doesn't take much to realize that talk of other people's thoughts and feelings and inner experiences is really just the same sort of short hand, and that to any given person's honest and literal perspective, all other people really *are* just objects. (Which is not to say that they should be treated unethically or that there is no basis for ethics, but that's a whole other can of worms there).

And it doesn't take a whole lot more to go ahead and extend this shorthand to other complex systems, or even the universe as a whole; and from that comes a sort of pantheistic view of God. To talk of "God" is just to ascribe agency to the whole universe, a thinking feeling intelligence "behind" it all, the same way that we can ascribe agency to other people. Both of these cases are equally valid or invalid. They're invalid in that neither one is literally true, inasmuch as it's fundamentally impossible to ever have evidence that they are true, and so we have no real reason to ever think that they are true. But they are both valid, inasmuch as the ascription of agency to other people, and understanding the nature of those "agents", is useful for modelling interactions between people (including yourself) which should ultimately be of benefit to the individual using this model; and likewise, the ascription of agency to the universe and the understanding its nature (even in personified terms) p

Re:Autism, Other Minds, and Religion

[Anonymous Coward]

Disclaimer: I believe I am a neurotypical but I don't really know how to tell. (In fact, the less context I create for myself, perhaps the more my mind can consider, so usually I avoid defining myself)

This is a great comment, thanks for posting it. The concept that *there is no direct evidence that people other than the observer feel anything* is something that I never decided to consider before, although I have always wondered about others' inner experiences and if they even have one. To know that someone else actually considers these things is interesting.

I have a friend that thought, when he was a kid, that he was the only real person and everyone else was a robot. It's interesting because I have thought this as well when I was a kid, and although I continued to consider things as if it were true, I also continued to function as if everyone else were real, perhaps to try and discern if they were or not, to see if I could catch them slipping up. There's no way I could really ever know, but getting caught up in the "human drama" by acting as if it is true is no more right/wrong than acting as if everyone else isn't real. There's no way to know either way.

From what I understand about what you feel though, it seems that you default to not recognizing others' emotional states because it hasn't been proven to you that they exist. But it's equally impossible to prove that they don't exist. Why default to the former and not the latter? If you have your own inner experience, do you believe that you are the only one?

Also, I support your belief when you say that bridging an understanding between highly different perspectives can do a lot, and I explore these things a lot on my own. I'm glad to find that someone else does, it gives me hope that we might understand each other a whole lot better in the future.

Unfortunately I modded in this post so I must post anonymously so that my moderations are not undone.

Re:Autism, Other Minds, and Religion

[Pfhorrest]

Disclaimer: I believe I am a neurotypical but I don't really know how to tell. (In fact, the less context I create for myself, perhaps the more my mind can consider, so usually I avoid defining myself)

I think that's a good approach to take. I also dislike categorizing myself, particularly because I never seem to fit nicely into any category, but also, as you said, because doing so is self-limiting. The way I see it, the 'autistic' mindset and the 'neurotypical' mindset are just the far ends of a continuum, and not only do people fall at different places in between those points, but they don't stay at any one point from moment to moment. As I think I said, I notice myself swinging between the ends a lot; I can be both, just not at the same time.

This is a great comment, thanks for posting it. The concept that *there is no direct evidence that people other than the observer feel anything* is something that I never decided to consider before, although I have always wondered about others' inner experiences and if they even have one. To know that someone else actually considers these things is interesting.

It's actually not an uncommon philosophical topic. It's usually discussed in that milieu as "solipsism", if you want to Google for other conversations or papers about it. Solipsism is actually a little broader than just this though: it's the notion that there's really no way to tell that all of the universe isn't a hallucination or dream from which one cannot awake, and that you may actually be the only thing that exists. A lot of times people say something "reduces to solipsism" as an insult to whatever they're talking about, as though solipsism is an absurd position that you wouldn't want to take, but I see solipsism as a truism: yeah, there's no way to tell that anything other than me really exists. So? In that case the universe still seems exactly how it was before, so why should I behave any differently? If I can't wake up from a dream, ever, then that dream is reality to me, and I ought to treat it as such.

Likewise, whether or not people have inner experiences makes absolutely no difference whatsoever in how other people seem to me. They still behave the same way, and my behaviors still have the same impact on them (and their behaviors), and so on. It's basically a meaningless thing to talk about "inner experiences" at all, as much as it would be to say that there is some big invisible, incorporeal, odorless, tasteless, soundless thing sitting in my living room. That's indiscernible from saying that there not some big thing in my living room (since this supposed big thing is utterly undetectable), so why bother even mentioning it? It makes no difference.

I have a friend that thought, when he was a kid, that he was the only real person and everyone else was a robot. It's interesting because I have thought this as well when I was a kid, and although I continued to consider things as if it were true, I also continued to function as if everyone else were real, perhaps to try and discern if they were or not, to see if I could catch them slipping up. There's no way I could really ever know, but getting caught up in the "human drama" by acting as if it is true is no more right/wrong than acting as if everyone else isn't real. There's no way to know either way.

Precisely! And not only can you not know either way, it's no difference either way - which is why you can't know. Me being the only thing that exists, and having a bunch of experiences of things which don't "really" exist, is no different to me than if I exist and have experiences of things which do "really" exist. All I can know is the experiences. And hell - since my only experience of "myself" is through some sort of experience of myself, there's really no point in saying "I" exist either. There are experiences with the subject of "me" and a variety of objects which compose "the universe", and that is all I can have experience of. There may be other experiences with other subjects (and thus, other subj

Picture

[loconet]

And here is a picture of the device..

Palahniuk

[chochos]

It only tells you if you're boring someone to death, but it's not that helpful since people who have this kind of problem usually won't know what to do in this case. Reminds me of a line from Diary: A Novel by Chuck Palahniuk:

Knowing when people are only pretending to like you isn't such a great skill to have.

It's something you can learn if you care to

[hackwrench]

Then those who claim to be the guardians of society accuse and label you an eavesdropper. There's just no winning with them.

MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Design

[SimHacker]

That petition was sponsored by the Discovery Institute, whose mission is to promote Intelligent Design. They are fundamentally dishonest because they say one thing in front of evangelical audiences, and another thing entirely in public.

The idea that the Intelligent Design and the Anti-Evolution Petition isn't about God and Creationism and teaching religion in schools is a ridiculous fraud -- that's exactly what they're about. The wording of the petition is meaningless because they're just the code-words of the Center for Science and Culture's "Wedge Strategy", to dress up the wolf in sheep's clothing. If they said what they really believed in public, they'd be a laughing stock, because they know damn well their position is totally religiously motivated, and anti-science. These people actually believe that Fred Flinstone's town of Bedrock is closer to reality than Darwin's theory of evolution.

To find the real meaning of those words, just look at how the petition is being (mis)used: The New York Times wrote that "advocates who have pushed to dilute its teaching have regularly pointed to a petition signed by 514 scientists and engineers".

Wikipedi article on the Center for Science and Culture:

Alongside the allegation that the Center intentionally misrepresents facts, critics also note that there is a noticeable conflict between what the CSC tells the public through the media and what they say before conservative Christian audiences. They allege that this is a studied and deliberate attempt at the obfuscation advocated by Wedge strategy author Phillip E. Johnson.[13] When speaking to a mainstream audience and to the media, the Institute portrays ID as a secular, scientific theory, that the teaching the controversy campaign does not promote ID, and that their agenda is not religiously motivated. But when speaking to what the Wedge document calls their "natural constituency, namely (conservative) Christians," the Institute's officers express themselves in unambiguously religious language that contradicts these statements. This in the belief that they cannot afford to alienate their constituency and major funding sources, virtually all of which are conservative religious organizations and individuals such as Howard Ahmanson, Jr.

If you think that the Anti-Evolution petition has nothing to do with advocating Intelligent Design and Creationism, then you're either extremely gullible, or you're intellectually dishonest yourself.

-Don

Strippers?

[triso]

...MIT collegues Rosalind Picard and Alea Teeters...

Those names sound familiar; I think they are the stage names of two strippers, erm, exotic dancers hired by the ENG. Society for the year-end bash a few years ago. Alea "48-DD" Teeters it was. Too bad I lost the photo of me sitting in her lap.

Re:Strippers?

[Lordpidey]

Wow, a stripper making something that vibrates? Who would have thought it?

Another device for the "socially challenged"

[Anonymous Coward]

www.realdoll.com

I need one of those

[noidentity]

to give to people when they are talking to me. If course I could just use a vibrator since most people bore the shit out of me with their inane truth-avoiding talk all the time.

Re:MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Desi

[bnenning]

I may not have been clear. I know perfectly well that the Discovery Institute consists of a bunch of anti-science charlatans, and how they're marketing the petition. As I recall several scientists who signed the petition did so because they thought current theories of evolution were incomplete (as opposed to wrong), and were annoyed that their names have been subsequently used to support creationism.

When speaking to a mainstream audience and to the media, the Institute portrays ID as a secular, scientific theory, that the teaching the controversy campaign does not promote ID, and that their agenda is not religiously motivated. But when speaking to what the Wedge document calls their "natural constituency, namely (conservative) Christians," the Institute's officers express themselves in unambiguously religious language that contradicts these statements.

Of course. The Dover trial showed how blatantly they're willing to lie. But hey, it's for our own good so we don't burn in hell...

Re:MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Desi

[SimHacker]

I always thought they believed in hell just for the hope that we would burn there. What's the fun in making up fantastic myths about sadistic punishments (and actually carrying it out during the Crusades), if not to threaten your enemies with eternal damnation? No wonder Muslims get nervous when Bush talks about Crusades and Infinite Justice.

Rosalind Picard knows quite well that her name is being used to support creationism, and about the New York Times article that mentioned her by name. It was totally her own decision to make her religious beliefs a public issue, and to drag MIT's name into the Intelligent Design debate. But she has so far failed to made any statements denouncing the Discovery Institute, so it can only be assumed that she supports the intellectually dishonest anti-science charlatans at the Discovery Institute.

-Don

Native emotion recognition isn't there

[postbigbang]

In non-autism/Ausberger's patients, these skills are there. You have nothing to build on with Ausberger's; it's a learned trait.

Speculation says that very bright children's minds develop more slowly than others do, also paralleling children with autistic traits. Some how, the queues are missed because perhaps, the mind is too young when it needs to learn these things... facial expressions, body language, and other non-verbals. Often verbal development is very strong, and audio/aural articulation is very strong in those otherwise expressing (a subset of) autistic traits.

In my family, autism runs strong, and before they called it Ausberger's, it strongly described most of the males and some of the females that were our ancestors in the family. I have Ausberger's traits, but not as strong as my brothers, one of whom is more like the 'Rain Man' than any of us. His traits are much tougher to change, and although he had severe perceptual difficulties as a youth, he's now able to live in a 'normal' world.

So, to summarize, somehow, what are native traits to non-Ausberger's/autistically-expressed individuals aren't present. Many of these seemingly normal abilities have to be learned because the learning stage for them isn't present or fails. It's not that it can't be learned, rather, it's easier to learn at the proper moment in the very young years than it is to learn it as a post-pubescent or even adult individual. The capacity to learn varies strongly among the autistically-expressed. In my case, not too tough. My father? He just learned to be very quiet in a strict household. When he actually spoke, it was better than Shakespeare, with the wit of Rodney Dangerfield and the expressiveness of Pascal. But he rarely spoke, choosing to write long letters, then emails, and hundreds of thousands of pages of elaborate documents. We all though it was just because he was Scottish. But he really had moderate Ausberger's.

Re:Native emotion recognition isn't there

[FireBreathingDog]

... the wit of Rodney Dangerfield ...

That's a sequence of 5 words I never thought I'd see...

Wrap-It-Up-Box

[Bob the Hamster]

Did anybody see the episode of Dave Chappelle where they had the fake commerical for the Warp-It-Up-Box? I am glad to see that technology becoming a reality!

http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player /play.jhtml?itemId=11879

s/warp/wrap

[Bob the Hamster]

s/warp/wrap

yeah, I can type :P

stress in voice changes priority in waiting line

[chriss]

During this years CeBIT I talked to some projects from German universities that were trying to measure stress levels from several biosignals and adapt system behavior accordingly. One of the systems was used in computerized telephone systems. They try to determine your stress level from changes in your voice. If your stress level rises, you get a higher priority to talk to a person instead of the machine. They told me that German Telekom was already using their system and this feature for their hotlines.

Chriss

Yeah...

[Lobo42]

Because the solution to a disorder where one has difficulty relating to and with those around them is clearly MORE TECHNOLOGY.

Crutch

[Mark_MF-WN]

A device like this isn't going to 'teach' anyone anything, it's simply a crutch that IMHO, will stifle development and learning.

I think it's hilarious that someone would say this about a tool, while sitting in front of a computer -- a tool that embodies that statement.

Re:Crutch

[Monoliath]

Obviously one has to keep the statement in it's context.

I didn't say all tools of this nature are crutches and stifle development, this 'particular' tool and it's 'application' IMO when it comes to autism (because there is a giant difference between growth and development when it pertains to autism....and growth and development when it pertains to using a computer...obviously).

I don't use my computer to try and understand people's facial expressions / for social growth and development because I supposedly lack the ability to recognize when someone is "bored" or "aggravated", I use my computer to write software and develop graphics. We're dealing with two totally different situations here.

What was the point of your comparison again?

Re:Crutch

[Mark_MF-WN]

My point was that sometimes it isn't worthwhile to learn how to do something if there is a tool that will do a better job for less effort. After all, isn't that why you use a computer to write software and develop graphics, rather than punching holes in cards and drawing using pencils, charcoal, and paints? If autists find it difficult to learn to understand facial expressions, and a tool makes it easy, why shouldn't they use the tool? I'm not quite sure why you think autists should have to do things the hard way, just to satisfy some odd naturalistic obsession about the evils of using tools to avoid challenges.

Re:Crutch

[Monoliath]

My point was that sometimes it isn't worthwhile to learn how to do something if there is a tool that will do a better job for less effort.

IMHO, taking this approach when it comes to social development is the reason we have so many socially inept individuals now.

Somethings are better learned through direct experience instead of using tools to make it 'more efficient' i.e. the subject content of this posts' parent. Just because something makes doing something easier, does that mean it is the 'best' way to go about getting it done? This is a whole separate discussion I know, but food for thought...

This is gonna save a lot more ppl than autistics..

[Ian-K]

That device would be an *EXCELLENT* present for some of the lecturers I had at uni.

Other applications:
- boring meetings ("Hello Mr CFO, here's a nice present for you")
- sales people ("why, yes, thank you, I've heard enough but I already told you 20 times that I'm not buying")

Fellow /.ers are welcomed to contribute other potential uses.

bored? A.D.D.!

[dsmatthews]

Perhaps it is the bored person who has the psych. problem. :-)

Don Hopkins Demonstrates Unintelligent Malign

[Moulton]

Anyone who has ever programmed a computer knows that 'hell' (AKA 'the pits') is a street term for an untamed recursion.

It's remarkably easy for a hill-climbing algorithm to go awry and end up descending into the hellish pits of the abyss.

The mathematical phenomenom of an untamed recursion is ubiquitous in the culture. The fact that those living in ancient times called it 'sheol' or 'the pits' or 'hell' is just an accident of naming. After all, who among us tumbles into the pit on purpose?

After all, the Sims were once called Dollhouse, no connection to Dalhousie University. Or not.

Suppose there were an episode of The Sims where some obnoxious character rails endlessly about some boring topic that interests no one save themselves? It could be written in Ruby on Rails, with characters depicted with tank treads on their faces.

I could go on, but I am beginning to bore myself.

And that would be the pits.

Perplexity, Frustration, and Boredom

[Moulton]

Life is full of perplexing problems, but perplexity is hard to read on the face. People at MIT tend to clench their teeth when wrestling with perplexing problems. But teeth-clenching is hard to detect.

Frustration might be easier to read than perplexity, but most people don't dwell in frustration all that long. They just give up and go on to pursue some other objective, putting the unsolved problem on the back burner or forgetting about it entirely.

Eventually, I suppose, people express boredom with old, unsolved problems, since nothing insightful has ever come along to illuminate a functional solution.

How many of us here can reliably distinguish phases along the slow journey from Intrigue to Perplexity, Frustration, Despair, Cynicism, Bitterness, and Terminal Ennui?

Oh, MIT Media Labs again...

[Anonymous Coward]

The MIT Media Labs...I'm stunned every time I hear about another one of their crack pot schemes, inventions, devices, etc. I imagine they must waste more funds on half baked futurist techno crap than any other group at MIT.

Re:Oh, MIT Media Labs again...

[goslackware]

The MIT Media Labs...I'm stunned every time I hear about another one of their crack pot schemes, inventions, devices, etc. I imagine they must waste more funds on half baked futurist techno crap than any other group at MIT.

Wooh-who!

Entrainment

[shambalagoon]

It sounds like folks with Autism or Asberger's suffer from an inability to feel communication entrainment. The more someone is engrossed in what you're saying, the more they lock into you, with their expressions, body motions, pace, and so on. I think this is the "intuition" that people talk about, but it's really an awareness of that lock-step, that entrainment. It's an awareness that can be more or less developed, and is mostly affected by your presence of mind and focus.

Under the strong focus of THC (if you are able to focus under it) you can see this in obvious terms, clear as day.

Obligatory Simpsons quote

[cellocgw]

"Oh, a BOREDOM meter. That'll be reeeally useful"
[machine explodes]
(yes, I know the original is "sarcasm meter")

Autism and Facial recognition

[Anonymous Coward]

In the process of getting rid of my aspbergers (and correcting my eyesight)i've noticed something interesting. My facial muscles had very, very limited range of motion. It was not that my affect was affected or anything but my ability to express that affect or to mimic others was the problem.

My face has changed. I've now got wide range of motion across my skull, i could be an actor with the amount of facial muscle movement i now have. Mimic'ing is no problem now, which is what most NT's have problems with because they expect a mimic and Aut's don't.

Then there's the whole problem of NTAut, it's a continuum people, it's not about which place is 'right' it's about learning how to move up and down the continuum depending on the situation. If i want to deal with details i turn autistic if i want to deal with people and the bigger picture i go NT.

What if the autistic person with this device...

[WebCowboy]

Encountered someone who wasn't "normal"?

I've never been diagnosed with any sort of disorder but from time to time I apparently exhibit "eccentric" behaviour. It isn't so much now but when I was younger. Among other things, it sometimes looks like I have ADD and it'll seem like I've zoned out or something has distracted me. Sometimes that is the case but very often I'm still listening or actually interested in what that person is saying. It drives regualr people up the wall so it'd probably hopelessly confuse an autistic person with this new device.

Anyways I'm not sure if some egghead has invented a syndrome to describe my quirks, but I think that every single person is just a bit off in some way and to varying degrees will react unconventionally. Heck...the problem is even simpler than that. What if the autistic person encounters a blind person, or someone with a facial palsy who is physically incapable of "looking interested"? I think it'll be a long time before there is a device sophisticated enough to interpret people's reactions with consistency (that'll only happen when we've figured out how to create a truly telepathic device rather than one that works on physichal cues).

With age I've become more perceptive of how people react to me and it probably helped make me more "well adjusted". I do notice, however, that I have a harder time among people who are physically and/or emotionally less mature (teenagers especially but generally under 25 years old). It's hard to describe but I'll more often get a look like I've just told a joke and they don't get it, or like the dog looking into the old RCA Victrola. In different (older) company I get vastly different reaction. How would an autistic person handle this? I thought that a person with autism tended to think like cats think--they learn that this action produces that reaction (or am I wrong there?). So, wouldn't it quite frustrate such a person if they behaved a certain way around, say, a teenaged girl and the device buzzed while the same thing wouldn't set off the device with a 50 year old man?

I guess you could file me under "doubting Thomas"

MIT's Rosalind Picard promotes Intelligent Design

[SimHacker]

So what's YOUR position on intelligent design, Moulton? Do you support teaching Creationism in science classes? Or are you one of the people who denies that Intelligent Design has anything to do with God or Creationism or teaching religion in schools?

Do you know what Rosalind Picard's position is on teaching Intelligent Design in schools? Do you agree with her? Does Picard really support the Discovery Institute, or will she denounce the way they've used her name to promote Intelligent Design?

-Don

Where's the problem?

[k2r]

Maybe I'm naive because I don't know any autistic person, but why not just tell the person you are going to have a long talk to that you need to have nonverbal signals expressed explicitly through words?

It's not that computer-glasses would irritate people less than being told which channels of communication are not available in a talk.

Would that work? How do you people with autism / asperger do this?
Or would you be annoyed personally if somebody told you "sorry, but mersenne-primes are not an interesting topic for me"

k2r

Intelligent Design

[Moulton]

My position on Intelligent Design is that it should be taught in the Engineering Curriculum, so that our engineered products are intelligently designed.

I support teaching Creativity, as I fear that our culture is sadly undercultivated in the Creative Arts.

Of course this is merely an opinion or belief of mine, which makes it my personal religion. Your Belief System may differ.

As you know, Roz supervises a number of graduate students who, one would hope, are intelligently designing their systems in MIT's program on Affective Computing.

Last Friday, I stopped by the Media Lab to participate in the project with Alea and Roz. Alea was video recording boring conversations, to get raw material for the facial expression recognition software to use as training material.

Roz and I tried to bore each other with dull stories, but I'm afraid we failed miserably, leaving poor Alea with several hours of useless recordings. I suggested that she record videos of herself reviewing the endless fragments.

By the way, your beliefs about Roz and her attitudes on the subjects that you are so obsessed about are chimerical, if not comical.

Now here's something interesting, Don...

Did you know that all three of us are redheads?

And did you know that redheads are unusually interesting characters for a variety of reasons?

All About Redheads

Re:Intelligent Design

[SimHacker]

Nice job at avoiding the question I asked by pretending to misunderstand the words and answering a different question. I'll try again, being more specific this time:

So what's YOUR position on intelligent design, as defined by this wikipedia article? I ask again: Do you support teaching Creationism, as defined in this wikipedia article, in science classes? Or are you one of the people who denies that Intelligent Design has anything to do with God or Creationism or teaching religion in schools, and tries to weasel out of answering these questions directly?

Can you please answer the question I asked, instead of trying to divert the conversation by pretending to misunderstand? When you pretend that I meant something else when I ask about Intelligent Design and Creationism, you're using one of the Discovery Institute's intellectually dishonest tactics youself.

Again, now that we're both on the same page: Do you know what Rosalind Picard's position is on teaching Intelligent Design in schools? Do you agree with her? Does Picard really support the Discovery Institute, or will she denounce the way they've used her name to promote Intelligent Design?

Come on now, what's wrong with answering the question directly?

-Don

Re:Intelligent Design

[Moulton]

My position on Intelligent Design is that it should be taught in the Engineering Curriculum, so that our engineered products are intelligently designed.

Consider, for example, the design of the God Function in so-called God Games. The God Function moderates the relationship between the human player (God) and the simulated characters inside the system model.

An intelligently designed God Function will yield an intriguing and persistent Life Drama within the framework of the World Simulation.

Which brings me around to a question for you, Don. How did you come to your insights on how to intelligently design the God Function in your various Sim franchises?

And more to the point, do you believe that it would be worthwhile to pass your insights on to the next generation of system designers?

After all, if your own system design meets the test of intelligence, wouldn't you want it to survive into future generations?

It would astonish me if you didn't believe in teaching the principle of intelligent design when designing systems that mimicked the dynamics of the real world.

Re:Intelligent Design

[SimHacker]

So you really think that engineers should apply the theory of Intelligent Design? Should a bridge be designed to only last until the Rapture, because the universe is only 6000 years old, and Jesus is coming soon? Should geologists take into consideration the "fact" that God burried dinosaur bones deep in the ground to test our faith when he created the Earth 6000 years ago, when trying to predict the next earthquake? Do you use a small pterodactyl as a telephone and a phonograph player, just like Fred Flinstone, because the bible didn't say anything about electricity or radio waves? Where do you draw the line?

What do you have against passing on the insights of Darwin on to the next generation of designers and engineers? If you have a better theory, then let's hear it!

-Don

Re: Intelligent Design

[Moulton]

I think social engineers should employ intelligent design in the construction of regulatory processes.

For example, in your various Sim games, how do you design the regulatory processes whereby the human player affects the course of events in the simulated world?

Do you use a collection of rules? Or do you use mathematical functions that transcend the expressive power of a collection of rules?

Why do you adopt your chosen regulatory architecture that you integrate into the design of the system?

Does it have to do with striking a balance between total predictability and total randomness?

How do you strike that balance, so as to make the game comprehensible and not totally bewildering, while rich enough to maintain some degree of suspense and surprise?

And what role does frustration, annoyance, and exasperation play in the experience of the person supervising the simulation?

The Discovery Institute's Intelligent Design Myth

[SimHacker]

Are we really both talking about the same Intelligent Design here, or do you continue to pretend to misunderstand me?

Yes, I get your joke about "Intelligent Design" having another meaning. Ha, ha, ha. Totally hillarious. Great joke. I got it last time, too. You've made the same joke twice, though, and it's time to move on. Now let's go back to the real topic of discussion: Intelligent Design as promoted by the Discovery Institute.

Do you insist that I give you the benefit of the doubt and take what you said at face value, and play along that you really mean that you and Picard support the Discovery Institute's version of Intelligent Design?

Publically and of her own free will, Picard signed the Anti-Evolution petition that many ID supporters cite as evidence that they're not fucked in the head. Do you agree that those people are out of their minds for wanting to teach ID in school, or not?

Let's establish some common ground, or find where we disagree. Do you or don't you and Picard agree with the position and techniques of the Discovery Institute? Do you really think that version of Intelligent Design should be taught in schools?

What is it about the theory of Evolution that troubles you so? How is that more troubling to you than the so-called "theory" of Intelligent Design, and the intellectually dishonest tactics of the Discovery Institute? Why do you publically support and cling to Intelligent Design, yet reject evolution? Are you so obsessed with your religion that you allow it to distort your logical deductive process, and reject the scientific process? Why won't you hold ID up to the same scientific rigor as Evolution? What kind of scientist are you, anyway?

Why are you and Picard so afraid of answering questions directly? If Picard is so embarassed about her irrational religious beliefs that she refuses to stand up for them, then she shouldn't have made them a public issue. Don't blame me for the Anti-Evolution petition and the NY Times article. That cat's out of the bag.

-Don

The Discovery Center

[Moulton]

Are you referring to the Discovery Center at the Boston Museum of Science?

I've been affiliated with them for about 18 years now.

At the Discovery Center, my main role is to supervise the Puzzle Activity.

The Discovery Center promotes the development of Scientific Intelligence and Insight, through Discovery Activities. Puzzle Solving is just one of the many activities we employ there.

One of the reasons I am affiliated with the Discovery Center at the Boston Museum of Science is that we are free there to address subjects that are not part of the regular public school curriculum.

This includes a healthy dose of functional reasoning.

But I digress. I suspect that my actual activities are nothing like those you would like to be able to ascribe to me.

What puzzles me, Don, is why you evidently desire to ascribe to me practices and beliefs that I am largely unfamiliar with. Is there some reason that it's important to you to falsely characterize other people?

The only thing about the Theory of Evolution that troubles me is its silence on how the DNA code arose in the first place. Probably this gap will eventually be filled in by some other theory. One of the open questions is whether DNA-based life arose on Earth, or arrived here via cosmic dust from some other world. It would surprise me if the answer to this question came out of Darwinian Science. More likely it will come out of the field of Molecular Biology or Space Science. Still, it's possible that we will discover some arcane forms of life in the ocean's depths that yield some insights into how nucleic acids came to their current role in Cellular Biology.

And yes, I really believe that systems designers should reason carefully about their designs, so as to construct robust and functional systems.

There is nothing quite so disappointing as a poorly designed system, whether it be a living system, an ecosystem, a civilization, or a computer game.

Re:The Discovery Center

[SimHacker]

So I guess the answer to the first question is "Yes, you do continue to pretend to misunderstand me".

I've given pleanty of links to defintions in my previous messages. Are you having trouble clicking on them? There is this thing called "wikipedia". And another thing called "google". Look up the terms you're having trouble (or pretending to have trouble) understanding.

Do you know how to use those reference sources, or is it against your religion to learn anything that contradicts the teachings of the bible?

You're still pretending to misunderstand, and avoiding most of the questions. Do I need to repeat them, or can you click in the links and read them again?

-Don

Re:The Discovery Center

[SimHacker]

By the way, stop accusing me of ascribing activities and beliefs to you and Picard -- I'm ASKING you what you believe in (again and again), not telling you what to believe. But both of you refuse to answer the questions! Seems pretty suspicious to me. Are you really weasels? Just asking!

-Don

Re: The Complexity of Life

[Moulton]

To my mind, the fundamental unanswered question is how DNA-based life arose in the first place.

Darwin predates the discovery of the DNA mechanism. His theory is consistent with our understanding of how the DNA-based codestrings are subjected to random variations, some of which happenstantially give rise to new species with marginally better chances of survival.

What neither Darwin nor modern molecular biology can yet explain is how DNA-based life arose in the first place.

Did it arise spontaneously here on the earth? If so, how did that happen?

Did DNA-based life arrive here via cosmic dust from some other source of origin in the cosmos? The evidence for that may be scant, but interplanetary science is working hard to discover evidence of DNA-based life on other bodies in the solar system.

We know that debris has been exchanged among bodies in the solar system. And we know that DNA-based organisms can evidently survive the rigors of the vacuum of space. If and when we do discover evidence of DNA-based life on other planets, the likelihood of the Theory of Panspermia will gain ground.

If and when we find substantive evidence that DNA-based life may not have been of terrestrial origin, we'll be back to square one on how and when it arose. And the possibility that DNA-based life was the product of molecular engineering by some long-lost race of intelligent beings (who themselves were not descended from DNA-based biochemistry) will have to be included in the range of theories to reckon.

For myself, I would be happy to learn that DNA-based life arose by elementary natural processes right here on Earth some 4.5 billion years ago. And I would be thrilled if the molecular biologists could construct a plausible model for how that happened.

But I would be equally happy to learn that the entire solar system was seeded with DNA-based life (or its immediate molecular precursor) from some otherwise unknown point of origin.

In other words, I am in favor of doing the scientific research to estlablish a plausible theory for the origin, emergence, and distribution of DNA-based life.

And I agree with Picard and others that Darwin's Theory alone is insufficient to complete our understanding of this part of the story.

If fundamentalists want to exploit my enthusiasm for scientific research to further their own political agenda, who am I to deny them their religious ecstacy?

And if Don Hopkins wants to similarly exploit my enthusiasm for scientific research to support his own bizarre beliefs about me or Roz Picard, who am I to deny Don his own peculiar brand of religious ecstacy?

Reverse-Over-Engineering

[SimHacker]

If playing games like The Sims causes you to believe in Creationism, then you're totally Reverse-Over-Engineering them.

-Don

Game Playing

[Moulton]

It's been a while since I played any of the Maxis God-Games.

We used to feature SimSafari in Cahners Computer Place at the Boston Museum of Science, and I found some time to play it, some years ago.

I recall playing SimCity, SimEarth, and SimAnt back in the '90s. I've never seen The Sims.

Which brings me around to a design question for you...

I was thinking about 'manna' this morning.

'Manna' is a strange term that refers to some essential scarce resource. If a system runs out of 'manna', it collapses.

It's hard to figure out what the 'manna' is for any given system (real or simulated), at least until it becomes so depleted that the system begins to die.

So the question of the hour is this: What is the name of the 'manna' that sustains synthetic worlds like SimAnt, SimEarth, SimSafari, or The Sims?

In real human cultures, a few candidates come to mind...

    A. Funding.

    B. Attention.

    C. Respect.

    D. Amusement.

    E. Grace.

    F. Insight.

    G. Progress.

    H. Functionality.

    I. Leadership.

    J. Fairness.

    K. Sincerity.

    L. Challenge.

    M. Mystery.

    N. Drama.

    O. Other ________.

What are the critical resource -- the 'manna' -- that synthetic systems like The Sims need to sustain themselves?

What is the 'manna' that synthetic worlds (and other systems like them) are most in danger of depleting, due to lack of guidance by the human player who assumes the role of God in these simulated cultures?

Whose role is it to identify and husband the critical resources? Is it the job of the human player, or do the simulated characters bear the responsibility of discovering and husbanding their most critical scarce resource?

What if the critical scarce resource is the providential intervention of the human player who assumes the role of God in these simulations? Would the characters then adopt the practice of beseeching their godlike supervisor to grant them boons?

The Joy of Being Misunderstood

[Moulton]

I hope you are enjoying being misunderstood, Don.

It makes for an amusing storyline, doesn't it?

Think of Clint Eastwood's memorable line, "I'm afraid you've misjudged me."

It's great sport to be misunderstood and misjudged, isn't it Don?

Let's continue trading misunderstandings, misconceptions, and misjudgments until we've throughougly entertained ourselves to the point of utter banality.

Then we can distill our sobering experiences into simulated dramas full of realistic annoyance, frustration, and exasperation, in strict accordance with Clancy's Theorem.

This I Believe

[Moulton]

I previously told you what I believe, Don.

I sincerely believe you enjoy acribing imaginary beliefs and practices to others for the purpose of maligning and ridiculing them.

I happen to believe that's a ridiculous and unsustainable practice, but then everyone is entitled to their religious ecstacy, are they not?

What puzzles me, however, is what kind of joy you acquire through this peculiar practice of willfully inventing chimerical beliefs and ascribing them to total strangers.

My first theory is that you enjoy the ensuing drama.

Are you a dyed-in-the-wool drama junkie, Don?

If so, I think we might be able to collaborate a bit, as I have some oddball theories about drama, but scant experience in the art of crafting an intriguing drama.

Anti-Drama Statement

[Moulton]

I am skeptical of claims for the ability of random remarks and simulated scandals to account for the complexity of drama. Careful examination of the evidence for Drama Theory should be pursued.

Reading Emotions on the Face

[Moulton]

Some emotions are easy to read on the face. Laughing and crying are pretty obvious. Surprise isn't too hard to detect. Frustration and anger tend to be easier to observe in children than in adults.

Boredom, annoyance, and perplexity are examples of emotions that an observer might not detect right away, depending on how strongly they are displayed.

The project at MIT seeks to develop methods for recognizing facial expressions associated with various emotions. Boredom is just one of many meaningful emotional states that the MIT system is being trained to recognize.

One of the interesting results is finding out which emotional expressions are easy to recognize, and which are harder to recognize. Agreement and disagreement, for example, tend to correlate with head nods and head shakes, which are relatively easy to detect. Frustration and confusion, associated with brow wrinkles, are fairly easy to detect if the subject hasn't taken Botox treatments.

Although it's fairly easy to track the direction of gaze, it's not always easy to discern the specific emotional state associated with different patterns of eye gaze direction.

There is evidence that people can learn (perhaps with good coaching) to become more keenly observant of subtle facial expressions, and more responsive to the inferred emotional state of others.

Working out the technical details of empathy is a useful branch of research, with benefits for the development of emotional intelligence in both humans and machines.

Mars To Don... Mars To Don...

[Moulton]

Greetings Earthling.

Welcome to yet another episode of SimScandal.

We go straightaway into our first round of questions for today's distinguished guest panelist, SimHacker the Pickle-Faced PieMan.

Today's question was submitted by Boddler, of Mr. Dodger's Neighborhood...

Boddler asks SimHacker Don: Are you now or have you ever been a non-believer in the tenets of Christianity?

If your answer is 'yes', Boddler also wants to know if your disbelief is mere skepticism of one or more of the tenets, or if it's wholesale rejection and express denial of the entire package.

If your answer is 'no', Bodler wants to know if you are simply a non-committal student of the tenets of Christianity, or if you are an enthusiastic evangelical proponent of the storyline.

In either event, how do you feel about being thrust into the role of misapprehended target of a hoary scapegoat drama? Do you find it an exhilarating spiritual experience, or a dreadful rerun of a banal soap opera?

Please limit your response to a few well-chosen words that accurately describe your affective state. You need not modulate your facial expression if you prefer not to give away any such nonverbal signals.