Slashdot Mirror
Company Trains the Autistic To Test Software
Aspiritech, a Chicago based non-profit company, has launched a program to train high-functioning autistic people as testers for software development companies. The company says autistics have a talent for spotting imperfections, and thrive on predictable, monotonous work. Aspiritech is not the first company to explore the idea of treating this handicap as a resource. Specialisterne, a Danish company founded in 2004, also trains autistics. They hire their workforce out as hourly consultants to do data entry, assembly line jobs and work that many would find tedious and repetitive.
They own the future.
I know many will say this is reprehensible, but I honestly think this is something respectable for individuals suffering from autism to do. Honestly, besides grocery store jobs, I have never seen other types of companies hiring these individuals. Of course there are others, but I haven't seen any.
Bring on the Epsilons...
High Functioning Autism isn't really a condition that impairs people from doing more complex work. It's really similar to Aspergers Syndrome, and people with these two conditions are the kinds of people who would can get good educations and be great programmers.
(I hear Silicon Valley has a higher prevalence of Aspies, likely because the kinds of jobs found there are a good fit for Aspies and tend to attract them to the region.)
The writer must be a programmer because as a tester, I find the phrase "predictable, monotonous work" offending. Sure, parts of testing can be predictable and monotonous, but a good tester goes outside the box and the majority of testing is not the predictable monotonous type. If testing was predictable, then it wouldn't be needed. If it was predictable that certain bugs would be found then a good Engineer would always fix it before it was found, making it not predictable anymore.
Dave had mild Aspergers. We got him to do the hassling as he couldn't sense the irritation of the people he was calling.
consultants? nice way to get out of paying for there health care and makeing them pay all the taxes on there own. How about helping and makeing them w2 workers?
There have been corresponding declines in the diagnosis of mental retardation.
Of course, calling someone retarded is far more impolite now than calling them autistic. Makes it a lot harder to say what the real trends are.
(And of course, they'd probably make great software programmers.)
Poor non-verbal skills....check
Poor eye contact....check
Lack of empathy....check
Problems starting conversations....check
Wants routines....check
Sure sounds like every engineer I know. Mild autism, asbergers, ADD *or whatever the latest diagnosis is); unless is is severe half the symptoms apply to large groups of people.
Interestingly on a similar trajectory as selfish idiots who insist on squirting out some kids on the verge of menopause (when other things, like downs syndrome goes from a 1:1200 risk to a 1:30 or worse risk).
Anyway, it's great for people to be self-sufficient as long as they are capable of fending for themselves and not at risk of being exploited in ways the "normal" worker is not.
On the topic of Autism, I suggest everybody read "The Speed of Dark" by Elizabeth Moon. It puts the condition into a very approachable context that allows the reader to live through the eyes of an Autistic. It also has a great science/research back story that us geeks like.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
Or maybe a better way to say that is a lot more autistic people used to unfairly be considered unintelligent.
except you just can't get the purchasing power to deliver the benefits you will need for the income you will get.
Nullius in verba
That is because mental retardation was an umbrella diagnosis that didn't convey any useful information. Most people with any kind of mental disability were given that diagnosis. As we learned more about these kinds of disabilities, we began specifying different kinds of mental problems. It's like the difference between calling a person educated and calling them a physicist.
These names seem to be disparaging. Would you work for a contract agency named Shortbusstaffers or a software company named Weonlyhirethementallydifferent?
In Holland Specialisterren (hmm, sounds familiar) does the same.
The project was a huge database migration, so we would give the kid excell sheets with thousands of records to compare data consistency, validating scripts and data transformations, while management smiled "that'll keep the kid busy for a few months".
Now, he loved wikipedia, and we'd only see him read franically on wikipedia... at the end of the day, he'd walk up to the IT-manager, each time again:
"I'm sorry sir, I did my best today but I could only manage to go through 70% of the list. I found some errors which I marked. Next time, I'll try harder, I don't want to dissapoint you.", while the same look of disbelief was on his face over and over again.
All the consultants that passed through the project with their programming knowledge, could not match the comparing accuracy of this kid with his massive speed, while he just seemed to be reading wikipedia, apoligizing each evening when he went on his way home in all his quirkyness being very thankful to get the "opportunity to work with pcs".
It's maybe relevant to mention the project was an agressively low priced fixed project, going over schedule so the client being hired for the project kept on dumping starters and benchers to finish the project with the problems you could imagine. It's why I was hired the period of the project to support the other consultants who were stuck in the mess they've been creating trying to get the project done.
If I would have the opportunity again to work with and rely on autistics for tasks needing massive concentration and accuracy, I'll put all my trust in their hands.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
Slashdot has been hiring mentally handicapped people as moderators since 1997. Now that's truly groundbreaking!
Troll? Really? The world for mod points. Are there a lot of late life conception slashdotters out there?
Not only are late life conception children statistically more likely to have mental "issues" of some nature, I suspect there's a correlation between late life conception and other issues such as bi-polarism and schizophrenia. Evolution favors early and successful reproduction and hasn't had time to deal with reproduction capabilities of long-lifespan organisms.
Mod me down if you want, but controversial does not equal -1 Troll.
Company Trains the Autistic To Test Software
But if somebody has written some software to train autistic people, it would be:
"Company Tests Software to Train the Autistic"
What if a weird consultant is to do some work for some developer tools company:
"The Autistic to Train a Test Software Company"
What if some ill behaved company is about to release its Railroad tycoon clone:
"The Autistic Company to Test Software Trains"
Jesus, I would expect something better from Slashdot
A lot of you are suggesting that high function Autism is mental retardation. It ISN'T!.
I am very disgusted with the fact that people on here are totally blinkered and think its retardation. My 5 yr old son, just last week was tested for three hours and its been found that he has slight Autism. He is NOT retarded in any way shape or form. He is an exceptionally intelligent little boy. He just has trouble focusing on simple to learn tasks that are not within his interest. Case and point, at age 2 he could tell you what every single car was in the parking lot by looking at the manufacture's logo. Every one. even the odd ones that you don't see a lot of like Ferrari and Lamborghini (well you don't see many here in the white mountains of New Hampshire).
At age 3 his focus went from that to NASCAR, and he could tell you every driver, sponsor, number, what car they drove. Now he is into trains, he can watch an episode of Thomas the Tank engine and recite the whole episode word for word in order after watching it ONCE. He could read at age 3, he could write his name at age 4. He can count to 30+ and knew all his ABC's at 2 and a 1/2.
However he has problems if you break his routine, when he talks to you he will turn every conversation around to focus on what he is interested in. He has social skill problems when he deals with his peers who are of the same age. Adults not really a problem, and thats due to most adults being of a higher level than most kids his age. I personally think he has aspergers as he is very social and will will approach people and talk to them. We have has some simple tasks like one half of potty training that he still hasn't mastered at age 5, and we now know how to handle that, because all the ways we were trying were disrupting his routine.
The pediatrician came up with a very good example of how his life will be with it. If for example he decided to work at a museum as the resident Ornithologist because that is what he was interested in, he would excel at that job. He would have a perfect memory for that task and would know EVERYTHING about it. He would be a walking encyclopedia on the subject. Everything else would be secondary.
If he took up programming he would excel at it if he was interested in it. Seriously HOW IS THAT RETARDATION? Low functioning Autism is totally different end of the spectrum. Its just that all Autistic people have their brains wired differently, they are NOT retarded.
I suggest you read this before posting any more retarded posts ok?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_speculated_to_have_been_autistic
Remember the article says High-functioning autism, please don't jump on the short bus as many of you have on here.
There have been corresponding declines in the diagnosis of mental retardation.
If anything there has been a huge increase. They just call it different things - autism, down syndrome, middle management, liberal arts...
Along the same lines, I highly recommend "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" by Mark Haddon. It's fiction but educational.
Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
Not trying to be antagonistic here, but I have to ask. Do you think your co-worker was being paid in-line with the amount of work he was doing? My only fear with this concept is that they may be taken advantage of.
... forum posting...
I don't think you actually know large groups of people. Or your large groups are very homogeneous. Those symptoms are relatively uncommon in people as a whole, something you find out when you start getting out of your Engineering type groups. Most people are very much driven by emotion over logic, and simply intuitively understand and love to communicate with other people. About everything. Do you know a girl who calls her mom 5 times a day just to talk? Do you realize that she is at least as common as people with autism-spectrum issues if not more so?
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Yes he can draw conclusions to it, He can compare the thing that happen in said episode to things in real life. Yes he can make new possibilities from the data he just learned. He is like I said a very bright and intelligent young boy. You leave him at his own devices on You Tube for example he will pick out and watch things that interest him.
He just has some quirky traits in his personality. He is very focused on what he is interested in. Some audio stuff like loud sirens, parades, people singing something as simple as happy birthday to him upsets him greatly. Its like his brain cant handle the overload of information. But he will play in a busy playground, with lots of kids making noise. He will watch a train go by but covers he ears for the horn, but not for the noises of the carriages.
You give him a problem and he can and will work it out. Left to his own devices severly I doubt he would perish (apart from the fact he is a child) he just has some quirks.. That is different from a child with a different spectrum of autism, they would not survive, some cannot even communicate or even speak. Every comment seems to stem from the lack of understanding on what Autism is and how it affects each individual.
Some are bad that they will need constant care. Some of the high level (like my son has) or aspergers, will have productive and normal lives, but will always be known as having some quirks. There are many HLA people who are scientists, Some even work at the University where he got tested, so I doubt my son would fail as you put it. I suggest you do some reading up on the different spectrums of the disorder, before posting just a comment.
Many people in life now could have Autism in the high spectrum but never got diagnosed from it. They could be successful and somewhat ruthless at their jobs because of it.
Actually, the Danish word "Specialisterne" includes a [plural] definite article in its suffix and can be translated into English as "The Specialists", or better translated as "The Professionals".
I have mild aspergers and a controllable obsession with patterns and perfection and flaws in logic. I'm also a very, very skilled software tester (and programmer) so I guess it's true. I catch things that nobody else does and they seem so obvious to me. I've had a few contract testing jobs and I ripped those software packages a new one in every case. Once the designers stopped being pissed at me for finding so many problems, they fixed them and were happy they hired me :P
So what if my brain doesn't associate names with faces with events and I have a poor concept of time, I'm going to pick out dozens of bugs in your software really quickly lol.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
rely on autistics for tasks needing massive concentration and accuracy, I'll put all my trust in their hands.
The more I hear this sentiment echoed, the more I think they're the ones who came out right, and we're the ones who are broken.
Seconded.
I worked with someone with Asperger's Syndrome as part of a large Government Y2K bug "fixing" team (and it was fixing, not checking). Senior management had prioritised the fixes based on how much each database was "worth" (i.e., how much they paid for it) rather than, more sensibly, on how much the databases in question would affect citizens were they not to be fixed.
The result of this was that three weeks before 1/1/2000, 50 databases critical for functions such as medical care, burials, garbage collection, liquor licences, care homes etc. had not been fixed. This work-experience chap with Asperger's who up until then had basically been the post room / tea-boy (as well as carrying out rudimentary IT tasks) offered to help.
We let him join the team and gave him all the database documentation to read just to keep him quiet as we were busy enough. He sat reading it for two weeks and we got on with our work and left him to it.
Then the tape arrived with a copy of all 50 databases on it for us to fix. Before we'd arrived for work that morning, he'd opened the post, loaded the tape and was fixing the databases one by one (having prioritised them well by importance without our intervention) at an unbelievably fast typing speed. Incredibly, as he finished the fixes for each database (which we obviously tested), it turned out that he had fixed it without error (so far as we could tell).
He finished fixing the 50th and last database on 30/12/1999. The "post mortem analysis" (as far as we could tell) in early 2000 was that he'd fixed all 50 databases perfectly within a week.
No, he wasn't under a regular contract, they also didn't know the output he'd have. When he was "hired" (allowed to sit around and have tasks handed to him to "integrate") they thought they were doing charity...
At least that was my impression, I never saw the guys paycheck, but he also wasn't there fulltime :)
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
And yet you misspelled "paid." As an AS kid, you fail.
Exactly my point. There probably aren't more actual cases of autism -- we just got better at identifying them as autism. (Now I feel like I overestimated the intelligence of the Slashdot crowd, assuming they'd all get the inference, and that I didn't need to spell it out.)
I've heard the same sentiment noted by a mother of autistic child, but for a different reason. She had to teach her boy to lie. A lot. For some reason, our social norms require us to lie more/less constantly.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
and he can run circles around most other children his age. He began learning mathematics by age two. By age five, he knows more about the solar system then many adults. He even understand, in principle, the behavior of celestial mechanics (though he doesn't understand why, he is still only five). The reason I say this is because most autistics don't need special jobs nobody else will fill. Most of them are better than average people. They fall behind because the educational system failed them. They were not given therapy and support at a very early age. People really have no idea my son is autistic at this time. He has learned skills to adapt. But he still has his autistic strengths. Data entry and software testing are for muggles. Autistics are meant to be software engineers, software architects, scientists, mathematicians. This company is capitalizing on the failure of society to properly develop its autistic children.
You simply haven't yet worked out the illogicality of your thinking.
So do I.
Yes you did. You said: "It is simply a deliberate gamble with a innocent persons life when one makes babies at 45. There are absolutely *no* excuses, in my opinion." If you say their are no excuses, then you are saying that at 45 a potential parent should always choose NOT creating a life, rather than creating a life that may have autism. That is valuing a life with autism as worse than no life at all. And yet we are no talking about a certainty of autism, but merely a raised change. So you are saying it's better to have no life at all than to have an increased risk of autism.
Where you might be confused is that you are imagining it as instead being a choice of having a child at 45 vs a child at 25 (say). But life doesn't work like that. It may be that a woman hasn't met the right man to settle down with at 25. No one makes the decision to have a child at 45 vs 25. They just make many decisions along the way to have a child now, or not have one now.
If you say their are no excuses, then you are saying that at 45 a potential parent should always choose NOT creating a life, rather than creating a life that may have autism. That is valuing a life with autism as worse than no life at all.
No it isn't. It's about not taking risks with other peoples' lives for the sake of self-gratification.
It has nothing to do with valuation, the ones suffering are the autists themselves and not, at least mostly not to the same degree, their surroundings.
On the contrary, they can, as is the subject of the article, be very valuable to society.
But just because patient H.M., for example, was extremely valuable to the medical society, we would not wish his fate upon others??
To me, it seems you're the one being confused and the one bringing life value into the argument. Again, it has nothing to do with valuation.
If a woman meets the right man at 45 and decides to conceive a child completely regardless of reasons, it is with total disregard of totally known risks.
If adoption isn't a sufficient substitute, then having a child should be avoided.
And it's not only that. There are other things than autism, like downs and the like.
It is about being too old when the grown up children need their parents help, it's about being to old to be substantially relevant to a teenage who lives in the now. Totally. Get it?
Baboons are cute.
I agree, autism is not retardation. Everyone has a slightly different way of thinking and being, whether because of genetic or experiential variability. Some of us do not get on well with their social environment, because they differ too much, or on the wrong points, from the cultural norms. But the "problem" is in the incompatibility, not in one side or the other. When it's one against many, however, the minority (or the ones with least legitimacy) will become regarded as "abnormal", as people who have a certain syndrome, though we might just as well say everyone else has a "syndrome".
It even doesn't have to be a minority. The situation may be much more complex than a black and white division. If only enough people keep on carrying an ideal that never totally fits anyone, and if they keep on hiding their own "imperfection" because they are afraid to be "deviant", the ones who do show the despised traits - because they are too different, maybe, to be able to keep up the appearances, or because they feel imprisoned by what society imposes on them and, consciously or unconsciously, chose to do away with it - will still end up to be considered less fit, less worthy. Even these persons, for whom the ideal turns out to be a very negative thing, often keep on supporting it, by thinking they are "different" and "unable to attain" it.
And there the labeling comes into play. A person may be relieved to find out he's "autistic". It may help him to get recognition, support and understanding from people around him, and his family and friends may be relieved and better able to give him a place. But it can also promote a negative self-image, rigidly structure other people's reactions - as if the person they deal with is only an instance of the "autist" type and noting else - and thereby impose yet another regime of norms and expectations on the "deviant" person. As long as the person concerned is happy with that - not problem. But we have to keep in mind the label is very much a self-fulfilling prophecy. At he same time as it is a road to a more or less culturally accepted way of being, it is a powerful device for society to keep the labeled person in check, even if never consciously designed for that purpose.
As such, the label is a cultural construct, not a reflection of unquestionable, empirical reality. The only way to escape the restrictive simplifications imposed by the label, is to realize it's existence and to transcend it, to face what it hides, what lies underneath, in all it's complexity. Even though a full understanding is not withing human reach, we can try and use more sophisticated, colorful, and - precisely because such an understanding is unattainable - fluid and open conceptions.
As for autism, while i'm aware that it is reified by scientific research, by standardized diagnosis, descriptions, therapies, statistics, organizations and popular conceptions, i'd argue that it's still a model, that there is no such thing as the ultimate autist, but only people, *human beings*, to whom this model, even if not fully applicable, is applied - and *ascribed*. As i said, and as everyone who knows an "autist" will probably agree with, people labeled autists are persons and should be dealt with as persons, not as a personage from a psychology manual, popular book or expert's description. Manuals will never fully describe what a person is like. They may be helpful, but only if we remain open to different realities, if we are willing to see the person we are dealing with not as an example of a certain category, but as a human being just as much, and on the same level, as ourself. I think the world would be a better place if we tried to do so, if we tried to be understanding to each other, regardless of alleged "syndromes", and to find ways - not in general, codified on a high level, but on the ground, in practical situations - so that everyone can feel okay with his or her place in society. It's idealized, i know, but we can try our best...
What this means for the main s
Well, at the very least, it's pretty clear that they didn't come out wrong, but with a very useful skill set. I have similar sentiments about ADHD: if you're in a group of cavemen going out hunting, you want someone in your group who will notice all the little things that folks who don't have ADHD ignore because that's not what they're focusing on. So if I have a task that involves looking around for anything unusual or interesting, I want someone with ADHD along, because he or she will find things I'll miss.
In fact, any "disorder" that is as common as high functioning autism or ADHD often indicates that it's not a disorder at all, but more a personality type that the rest of us have decided was annoying to deal with. For instance, autistic people are the most likely to announce that the emperor is walking around naked, which is extremely inconvenient for anyone who is selling clothing that everyone claims they can see but no one can.
I am officially gone from