Internet's view on people with Autism

Post Reply New Topic

I just recently discovered this website called "whatdoestheinternetthink, and you type in words or phrases and I guess the website uses an algorithm to collect data to get a general vibe on how the internet consensus feels on it. I typed in Autism, and was flabbergasted by the general negative consensus. I've been discriminated online for having autism before, however generally it's positive in cases I reveal it to other chatters. It got me thinking.. how many people really do find it negative, and are just being supportive incase they didn't want to hurt my feelings. Aspie got a 50/50 score.. well anyways, here's a screen shot.

[img][800:700]http://i.imgur.com/AoTMq.jpg[/img]

Dude, I typed in "aspergers" and it gave me 87% negative.

WOW! That's an interesting site!

...



....


....


For what it's worth, the internet has a 74.2% negative view of "Dirty Sanchez."

At least we beat that.




It IS an interesting site......

PS

goonsquad has a 100% positive rating!

http://www.whatdoestheinternetthink.net/goonsquad


Gee I'm swell!

Do we have details of the actual calculation? I'm a little surprised to see "the internet's" opioion rendered so perfectly.

I don't know.. some words like "Marijuana" are received heavily negative, and "pot" is a positive I guess. It's a unique site. I just clicked on "how it works" and this popped up,

"Since launching, this has sparked up some discussion as to how it all works. Well, you can understand that I don’t want to disclose too much of the ‘algorithm’ of the site. However: basically it searches based on associative (so far just English) sentences. The given search term is used in these sentences which are then sent off to the various search engines, counting the amount of results returned. (Sentences are double quoted before they are sent off, so as to make sure the search-engines search for occurrences of the *whole* sentence).

This, of course, produces questionable results which should not be taken very seriously. However, the more results (hits) returned, the more reliable these results can become. Do a search for George Bush and then Barack Obama, and you’ll see that the internet is certainly not far off – or perhaps even in-sync – with the result you had in mind.

My advice would be to do 10 ‘obvious’ searches, of which you are almost certain of the results, based on your perception of general opinion (e.g. ‘beer’, ‘sex’, ‘sleeping’, etc.) and then do 10 less obvious searches. If the first 10 convince you of even the slightest accuracy, the second 10 will perhaps be not as random as you thought."

, and disclaimer states - "The results are provided 'as is' and should not be considered reliable, nor do they reflect the opinion of whatdoestheinternetthink.net, its creators or Microsoft. Furthermore, results may vary greatly on a daily, or even hourly, basis. The results are merely a reflection of a majority in search term results reported by said search-engine."

-- I'd hope that people with autism aren't frowned upon. I searched "being gay" and it got 59% negative, although generally with the internet.. I come across so many atheists then I do in real life, I searched atheism, and got 97% negative.

this website should not be taken seriously

I typed in 'Adolf HItler' and got 54,5% positive

I am not sure this works well as I can't see the algorythm.

Apparently 71.3% of people are in favour of smallpox. Genocide is also approved of by the internet, but only just. The internet is also very positive about George W Bush.

Even if the site is accurate its not like a surprise that just like in society there might be a lot of negative stuff on the internet about autism and people with it. I am sure most other mental conditions are viewed mostly negatively to.

I agree with Vito. I typed in my own name and the internet is 98.5% absolutely positive about me.

Last edited by PHISHA51 on 05 Jan 2013, 2:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I typed in 'whatdoestheinternetthink' and it came out 100% positive

If you only type in "Hitler" it comes out with 57% negative.

Now that I think about it, the site would also have to be missing sarcasm. An odd amount of people seem to use sarcasm on the internet.

Or maybe it's not atypical of extremists to use the internet as a tool for interaction.

Most likely answer: The "program" is full of marklarky, or they just make up numbers from an existing list.

Either way, "The Internet" is not a statistically valid or authorative source. Why would anyone believe it? Maybe I'm missing some sarcasm in this thread....

"Girlfriend" was 99.4% negative and "ebola" was 32% positive. That thing needs some work before it can be taken seriously.

I was linked to this several months ago after someone noticed the result for "child pornography" is overwhelmingly positive, currently at 75.6% approval. "Child porn" however scores at 83% negative. Clearly, any results from this must be taken with a grain of salt.