I don't mean to sound demeaning when I say this, but I think it's better to be blunt for topics like this one. The majority of your comment seems like baseless

I don't mean to sound demeaning when I say this, but I think it's better to be blunt for topics like this one. The majority of your comment seems like baseless speculation to me. There is a vast amount of pseudoscience and armchair ideation about autism on the internet. This ranges from outright hostility towards those who have it, to minimization of its very real impacts on quality of life. I spent about ten minutes searching with the keywords "high functioning autism", "autism employment", "autism programmers", etc and could not dig up any studies substantiating the claims you've mentioned. This is not to say you're lying - I believe you actually did pick them up from somewhere. But I'm deeply skeptical of their clinical veracity and empirical provenance. Given how polarizing autism can be and how difficult it can be to research, I consider it harmful to be confidently describing "theories" like yours without much real support for the claims involved. In particular, I would strongly advise anyone reading this to resist the temptation to self-diagnose or self-identify (one way or the other!) based on a strange question designed to see if you actually think of a church steeple. If you believe you may be autistic, personally see a professional and try not to read into the popsci promulgated by radio interviews.