> Nearly every large company I've interviewed with would comply with a reasonable accommodation request for a legitimate disability

so neuro divergence isn't a legitimate disability?

> so neuro divergence isn't a legitimate disability?

It doesn't really matter if it is or isn't, if being able to function well around other humans is a job requirement, as it often is in technical occupations. Why do you think behavioral questions are often asked during interviews?

For the same reason someone who requires a wheelchair could not reasonably be expected to be a firefighter, or a blind person be a pilot or bus driver, regardless of any accommodation provided.

Yeah but software / digital is a great equalizer, where all kinds of people can contribute even with disabilities or neurodivergence. The whataboutism doesn't really work.

Sure. But if you are unable to really explain yourself and your thought process in the hiring process, they might feel like you are unfit for the interview. they are way more likely to pick a guy who might be a little worse than you in coding but they actually liked him in the interview.

I mean, this comment is literally an emotion. It's not a fact, and even if it was, well it's changing thanks to AI and all the people who promote AI, and AI isn't going anywhere, so neurodivergent people really I think might have to disclose it/ Maybe if they can truly prove that they are neurodivergent, companies can go back to remote interviews?

That depends on several factors. You should read the official guidance.

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-reas...