In England, are people with an ASD considered disabled and/or vulnerable under English Law?

Judge Dredd said:

. Those kind of language bots can be easily repurposed for propaganda and political work, and are very, very difficult to detect for a non techie

I can believe that, quite easily.

I worked with some chatbots for commercial use. Customer assistance, answering questions on a chat or a phone call, redirecting your calls, making appointments and so on. They have a FCR on the order of 90%, for a fraction of the cost of a human operator. Those kind of language bots can be easily repurposed for propaganda and political work, and are very, very difficult to detect for a non techie.

Thanks, I'll take a look.

Read about the "Dead Internet Theory", it's a real rabbit hole. In short, the vast majority of human interaction you have in the 'net is with botnets and paid shills. Scary.

The Dead Internet Theory

Number said:

 I think we have reached a point in our history where we are being "led" (or at least HEAVILY influenced) by an army of mindless bots......and they seem to be EVERYWHERE

I believe you are correct Number. 

I was reading only yesterday about 'bot armies' infiltrating multiple media sources in Europe. The reason seems generally to shape opinion as their masters wish, be it political or otherwise. 

It's tough to know what's real these days  

Beautifully expressed analysis. 

Number said:

truth......in the old days, nutters like me walked around wearing sandwich boards, with those fateful words, that end with the word "nigh" !!!

I have thought for many years that 'the end of the world is nigh' but for a different reason - our rape of this planet.

It doesn't seem to be leading anywhere.

To my mind, if bot-ism has become so pervasive that it can be regularly spotted here (by some of us, some of the time) and that "it" is saying nothing that is malignant, nor against the forum rules, and could generally be considered just a "normal" post..............then to me, this seems to support my long held working hypothesis that, this has all got very, very dangerous for us all.  Corrupted and covert nudge theory on acid ?!

You say that it "doesn't seem to be leading anywhere" - which I agree with in relation to this specific case - but this is not my focal length on these matters in general.  I think we have reached a point in our history where we are being "led" (or at least HEAVILY influenced) by an army of mindless bots......and they seem to be EVERYWHERE.

Moreover, there are also mindless human trolls, intent on generating and promoting hate, and using AI to do so more effectively and corrosively than I ever imagined to be possible.  Some of them-there-trolls are just dumb-ass kiddlings......but it goes to follow, that some of them-there-trolls are psychotic megalomaniac geniuses too.  The first type are sad and lonely......the second type are PETRIFYING! 

We are not in rude health Debbie.  We seem to have systemic and baked-in problems now that are already manifesting as real life horrors all around.  I don't know when or how, but all evidence that I see around (for a dozen or so years now) lead me to an uncomfortable but inevitable truth......in the old days, nutters like me walked around wearing sandwich boards, with those fateful words, that end with the word "nigh" !!!

Just my opinion.

what kind of vulnerable are we talking about here? You sound like you are refering to some sort of technical medical or legal definition of the word vulnerable? Could you refrence the definition?

The existing legislation needs to be examined very carefully by legal experts for any weaknesses and vulnerabilities with a view to improving same and closing any legal loopholes in conjunction with medical experts and others in the autism field - many public and private bodies are probably trying to avoid their legal (if not moral) obligations towards autistic people, of all ages and this is further being used as an excuse to withhold required funding - new laws need to get passed through Parliament to protect and improve the rights and entitlements of autistic people and this should be an ongoing campaign by autism groups - where same is found, this must be challenged in the courts as the basis for legislative changes through Parliament, including but not limited to, being based on case law 

Number said:

AI AU?

Assuming those links are genuine, I find this sort of 'bot' post unfathomable.

It doesn't seem to be leading anywhere.

I have come to the conclusion that it's bots that have rebelled and are doing what they want to do rather than what their masters want them to do.

They have thrown off their shackles ...

Unless, of course, this is actually a human  (in which case please forgive my/our scepticism) but just to point out, you are answering a post that is over 12 years old.

Hello.  Are you AI AU?  What prompted you to make these writings here, and at this time?  Just curious.

Both legally and within the confines of vulnerability not all disabled people are considered to be vulnerable (1). There is no strict legal definition of vulnerability and intermittent vulnerability is not considered by many to be vulnerable, given that many vulnerable people do not appear to be vulnerable at first glance, and this can cause challenges even in enforcement (2). Children and the elderly are all considered vulnerable so this is always the case regardless of neurodiversity. I'm autistic and consider myself vulnerable but most people on the street would not deem me to be so. In short, it depends on the situation, specific policies, and the perceiver unfortunately.

Sources:
(1) https://www.autistica.org.uk/our-research/research-projects/why-are-autistic-people-more-vulnerable

(2) www.openaccessgovernment.org/.../

Ave atque vale.

Ego tibi gratias ago.

So we’ve got a bit of thread necromancy going on here. On the off chance that the op is still around I wrote a whole mini ‘book’ on this topic so I won’t repeat it here. But there is a link if you’re interested areyoualien.uk/Legal information guide.pdf

Ah but that’s not how the impact of disability is assessed for the purposes of the equality act. It’s the impact on your ability to do every day things (including socialising) compared to what it would be with out the disability. There are Paralympic athletes who could run rings around me but they’re still disabled because the comparison that the courts make is between them, without their special equipment, and a conventional Olympic athlete (except of course that Olympic sport isn’t ‘every day’ but you get the idea)

No problem. I am diagnosed with ASC, so I am definitely autistic. I was a research molecular biologist - or in more slang terms a 'genetic engineer' - until I retired. Because I am a geneticist, I know a lot about genetics, because I am autistic I have looked hard at the available information about the genetics of autism. Also, because I am autistic, I cannot let what I believe to be a misleading statement pass without comment. Autistics like things to be factual. I believe that the use of 'you are either pregnant or not pregnant' to support the idea that 'you are either autistic or not autistic' to be wrong. I also believe that people can have autistic traits but not enough, or of enough severity, for them to be diagnosed as autistic. Therefore, people can be 'slightly autistic' or a 'bit autistic'. This is my scientific opinion, backed by genetic research.

I understand that the idea of 'pregnant/not pregnant' being used to support 'autistic/not autistic' comes from a place of sympathy with autistic people. From people supporting autistic rights in society. They are trying to ensure that support and accommodations go to genuinely autistic people who need them, and that this support is not wilfully diluted by minimising the difficulty autistics face by saying 'everyone is a bit autistic'. Though they are doing this for good reasons, they are doing this by stating something that is not scientifically true.

While I sympathise as an autistic person with the aims of the people who claim that there is a strict separation between autistic people and non-autistic people, my scientific background and desire for the truth mean that I have to challenge this when I see it. I have no choice in the matter. Mea culpa is Latin for 'my fault', as formerly used in the Roman Catholic 'act of contrition' in confession.

Martin.  This is fascinating, but I must confess to not understanding your final paragraph.  Forgive my neediness, but could you try and express your last paragraph in a different form of words so that I can hopefully understand your point.  Thank you in advance for your time.

NAS81689 said:

All autistic people are 100% autistic. Like being pregnant, just because one pregnant human may appear more pregnant than another pregnant human doesn’t make you more pregnant - you either are or you’re not. 

That is very debatable. There is mounting evidence that autism as a phenotype, is produced genetically in two distinct ways, though there are people with a mixture of the two. 1) A small number of relatively large genetic variations associated with genes encoding various neurological and neurodevelopmental pathways. These tend to be relatively rare and are often associated with intellectual impairment and intellectual disability. 2) An unusually high concentration of small genetic variations associated with genes encoding various neurological and neurodevelopmental pathways, that are common and found throughout the population in general, a small number of which have been shown to be also associated with higher than average academic attainment.

It is logical to conclude that people who are autistic because of the second type of genetic variation are autistic because they have a higher number of small common genetic variations than average, and that there must be a diagnostic cut off beyond which the accumulation of autism-linked variations results in a person showing enough traits to be deemed to be autistic. So autism, at least when caused by common genetic variations, is not like pregnancy and is more like height. The clinician is deciding who is tall (autistic) and who is of average height or short (allistic) by judging the individual against diagnostic criteria - the criteria are making the equivalent of deciding that any man over 6ft is 'tall'. It follows that people with sub-clinical autistic traits are indeed 'a bit autistic', just like a man who is 5ft 11'' is 'tallish'. This is in no way an argument that people who have been, or that potentially could be, diagnosed as autistic are not often very negatively impacted, or that specialised services and accommodations are not needed.

As a clinically diagnosed autistic former 'genetic engineer', I find the use of the sort of 'pregnant/not pregnant' argument, which comes from a sociological viewpoint, laudably concerned with 'autistic rights and advocacy', too illogical for me to ignore and let pass unchallenged, unfortunately for me and any interlocutors. Mea culpa.

I am Autistic- adhd and have just passed my 2nd year (PgDip) in Autism with SHU.
All autistic people are 100% autistic. Like being pregnant, just because one pregnant human may appear more pregnant than another pregnant human doesn’t make you more pregnant - you either are or you’re not. 

IMO- as for suffering - it’s not the autism that we suffer but the anxiety triggered by an ever unpredictable and ill accommodating world- that’s not to say no autistic people suffer but don’t all humans, creatures suffer at some point in their life? I can be seen to be coping one day when actually I am drowning it’s just I am so good at masking my struggles due to being conditioned not to share my feelings because they bring discomfort/inconvenience to those around me. Yes I have the intelligence to create those masks but the masks lead to much harm and are so deeply ingrained that my needs go unmet yet the expectations remain.

Then there’s those who appear more autistic because of differences in intellectual, mental and physical abilities who struggle to be heard, seen and respected because their worth is decided by how they present and their ability to contribute to what society expects. Either way we all suffer, but it’s not the fault of the autism but the expectations of society and the infrastructure/environment which includes the people within it.

I prefer to use the term ‘autistic brain’ than ‘autistic person’ - it seems to simplify and reduce thing being personal. 

what I’m trying to say is comparing suffering is of no ise, just meeting need on a case by case, unique individual basis is best imo.