Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 12494 12495 [12496] 12497 12498 ... 12541

Author Topic: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)  (Read 6282482 times)

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187425 on: October 13, 2017, 03:18:20 am »

yeah, it's like... i don't think euclid would be confused by spherical geometry just because he didn't think of it at the time

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187426 on: October 13, 2017, 04:10:07 am »

Another factor is that people overestimate how smart modern people actually are. e.g. it's estimated that there are 15 dead people for every living person. That mean that the chance of the smartest person ever being alive right now are only 6%, regardless of what metric you use.

Also, at that level it's exponential. There's no "cap". So it's quite likely that someone hailed as the smartest of his generation, such as Turing, is literally far smarter than anyone alive today. People can't fathom genius so they extrapolate from "smart people I'm familiar with" and imagine someone slightly smarter than that. That's probably far off the mark.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 04:19:34 am by Reelya »
Logged

IcyTea31

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187427 on: October 13, 2017, 04:19:47 am »

That assumes people have an equal chance of being smart at any point in time. If IQ tests are to be believed, people get smarter with every generation, to the point that new tests have to be made harder every few years to keep the curve within parameters. Another factor is education, which has become more accessible, broader and just plain better all the time, but especially in just the last couple hundred years.

This is not to say smart people didn't exist or to devalue their efforts at all. It just seems that they are more common nowadays than, say, 2000 years ago.

Edit: Also, most of the really dumb people didn't get recorded in history. Currently alive idiots more noticeable, but almost certainly existed in the past as well.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 04:22:40 am by IcyTea31 »
Logged
Raise the white flag and don't give up.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187428 on: October 13, 2017, 04:37:55 am »

That assumes people have an equal chance of being smart at any point in time. If IQ tests are to be believed, people get smarter with every generation, to the point that new tests have to be made harder every few years to keep the curve within parameters. Another factor is education, which has become more accessible, broader and just plain better all the time, but especially in just the last couple hundred years

Actually that's the same factor not "another factor". The original IQ test was crafted from student's school work, and all subsequent tests are calibrated off that: if another type of test doesn't conform to the test scores in Stanford-Binet, it's rejected. Binet never even claimed his test was an "intelligence test" it was merely to pinpoint at what level a student had absorbed the French language and maths curriculum, so the score "rose" with age, since older students were familiar with more of the questions.

Then the Stanford-Binet test was developed by merely dividing the score of Binet's "French schoolwork progress" test by your age (the quotient part of IQ) to somehow create an "intelligence test". But ... how is merely dividing a more or less randomly selected test by your age magically an "intelligence test"? All other "intelligence tests" since then need to be calibrated against something, so they're calibrated against previous intelligence tests. But since nobody can define intelligence or show how the previous tests "measure intelligence" whatsoever, this is merely the biggest circle-jerk in the history of psychology. It's quakery on the level of the most bullshit economic theory out there. e.g. there's no theory behind this. The only real theory here is "smart people are better at tests". Which tests? "Tests of smart people stuff".

All the fancy statistics they apply to the results is just smoke and mirrors. e.g. they traditionally said "males and females have equal IQ". That's one of the cornerstones. How do they know this is true? Because IQ tests are calibrated to produce that result. Women do better on some question types, and men on others. So they weight the amount of each type of question until it minimizes the gender difference. The "equal IQ" thing is circular logic, because the tests are crafted to make it so. It's not science, it's just a huge pile of ideological statsitical bullshittery and circular logic. Now, the problem is that "women have higher IQ". But ... men still outperform women on some question types, women outperform on others. So the tests could be calibrated to show equality again if they wanted. What's it showing really? It's showing that women are getting more educational attainment than they used to. The old "equal gender" IQ tests were calibrated during a time when women were under-educated. So they were inadvertently downplaying the impact of differences in education level between the genders, by adding more weight to "pro-female" questions. Now though, women are rapidly advancing in education, but the tests have solidified: they're not actively calibrating them any more like they used to. But the bias towards verbal questions remains in the test, so women have "higher IQ" now. But you could just as easily make a test that consistently showed equality or that men were smarter. There's no theory which explains why the current calibration between the maths and verbal portion in any way reflects reality.

Basically the thing IQ tests test most is your absorption of traditional schooling materials. Or things which have been proven to also correlate well with your absorption of traditional schooling materials. That's how the tests are "calibrated". There's a reason nobody cites IQ tests any more. They've been discredited in professional circles, because it was proven they don't predict interesting things they were supposed to, such as whether you're going to be any good at anything (0% predictive power of workplace success). IQ is more or less sociology fanfic now, rather than a tool people in sociology actually make use of.

However ... also remember that IQ due to education only measures population averages. In earlier times, higher education was limited to the wealthy, but also to extremely bright students. So exceptional outliers received higher education. That means that the general increase in school access for the working class and women could raise testable IQ scores, but have little relationship to genius.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 05:17:09 am by Reelya »
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187429 on: October 13, 2017, 05:14:34 am »

That assumes people have an equal chance of being smart at any point in time. If IQ tests are to be believed, people get smarter with every generation, to the point that new tests have to be made harder every few years to keep the curve within parameters. [...]
That's the Flynn Effect for ya :O Familiarity, and standardization over time.

[...]
All the fancy statistics they apply to the results is just smoke and mirrors.[...]
Now that's an insult to psychometricians, and the board I'm preparing for this Oct 30. :P But that's me taking that literally and limitedly.
Tests also take in the person's context, rather than the old and traditional way of 'mental age/chronological age'. And there is pretty much the note of 'while there is variance between men and women, they are statistically significantly equal' overall. :v

Quote
IQ is more or less sociology fanfic now, rather than a tool people in sociology actually make use of.
Reminds me of when the whole IQ "craze" happened, which left out EQ and other factors more contributing to one's performance--not that exact, but it helped characterize those factors.

Reading through Icy's notes has me recall the fun of history; you get to see how progress in concepts happen as they did. Pretty awesome.
Logged
Even though accounts vary, everyone has a legendary story to tell.

The Writer's Apprenticeship - A thread dedicated to literary art!

Tales of Shattered Dreams - My RTD, a continuous work in progress.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187430 on: October 13, 2017, 05:24:32 am »

Quote
'while there is variance between men and women, they are statistically significantly equal'

That misses a lot of nuance. For example, men have an SD of about 15 on IQ tests vs women with an SD of 14. It's similar on many other types of tests however, not just "IQ" tests.

That might sound small, but it means men have bigger tails on the distribution. At IQ 150+ (or IQ of below 50) it means there are something like 5 men to 1 woman. That's a statistically meaningful difference, right there, because outliers for traits are the ones that tend to be noteworthy, regardless of what we think the test is really measuring.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 05:26:47 am by Reelya »
Logged

scriver

  • Bay Watcher
  • I have a nice hat
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187431 on: October 13, 2017, 05:25:51 am »

It was visually stunning.

It made no bloody sense.

Are you referring to Blade Runner or Fury Road?

Fury Road.

Blade Runner is a piece of shit, but thatís just because Iím something of a purist when it comes to source material. Itís pretty good (the first one, anyway) if you donít consider how awfully it treats the book.

The book it adapted or the book it took its name from? Because I would say one of those got the shorter end of the stick by far.
Logged
Love, scriver~

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187432 on: October 13, 2017, 06:43:12 am »

Masters is pretty...awesome. :'( I haven't felt so free and so guided since I was in elementary--feedback over the stuff you do, and especially the mutuality is so awesome.

Spoiler: IQ stuff (click to show/hide)
Logged
Even though accounts vary, everyone has a legendary story to tell.

The Writer's Apprenticeship - A thread dedicated to literary art!

Tales of Shattered Dreams - My RTD, a continuous work in progress.

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187433 on: October 13, 2017, 07:26:00 pm »

The walls are a lie.

Castlevania speedruns can be absurd in all the right ways, some days.
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

ArchAIngel

  • Bay Watcher
  • Infested Pony
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187434 on: October 13, 2017, 09:15:19 pm »

The walls are a lie.

Castlevania speedruns can be absurd in all the right ways, some days.
Speaking of Castlevania, we have Hellsing Ultimate Abridged Episode 8.

Sirus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Resident trucker/goddess/ex-president.
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187435 on: October 13, 2017, 09:56:59 pm »

The walls are a lie.

Castlevania speedruns can be absurd in all the right ways, some days.
Friggin TASs. I love ones like these.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187436 on: October 13, 2017, 10:28:11 pm »

Masters is pretty...awesome. :'( I haven't felt so free and so guided since I was in elementary--feedback over the stuff you do, and especially the mutuality is so awesome.

Spoiler: IQ stuff (click to show/hide)

You actually might like this, it's Steven Pinker summarizing a lot of research into gender differences in cogintion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aAjvZoaDPE
Here's the full debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHhnqh6u3Vo

One of the most interesting bits of research is that if you give baby monkeys human toys to play with, boy monkeys prefer cars much more than girl monkeys. The same result has been found in two different species of monkeys in separate research. Plus as shown in the last link, toy-preference of human babies is predicted within a single gender by measure sex hormone levels. However there are wa bunch of academics such as the other side in that debate who claim all this evidence is fake news.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 10:45:36 pm by Reelya »
Logged

redwallzyl

  • Bay Watcher
  • [Lurking_Intensifies]
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187437 on: October 13, 2017, 11:03:24 pm »

Masters is pretty...awesome. :'( I haven't felt so free and so guided since I was in elementary--feedback over the stuff you do, and especially the mutuality is so awesome.

Spoiler: IQ stuff (click to show/hide)

You actually might like this, it's Steven Pinker summarizing a lot of research into gender differences in cogintion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aAjvZoaDPE
Here's the full debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHhnqh6u3Vo

One of the most interesting bits of research is that if you give baby monkeys human toys to play with, boy monkeys prefer cars much more than girl monkeys. The same result has been found in two different species of monkeys in separate research. Plus as shown in the last link, toy-preference of human babies is predicted within a single gender by measure sex hormone levels. However there are wa bunch of academics such as the other side in that debate who claim all this evidence is fake news.
As an anthropologist the first question I would ask about any such studies whether IQ or toy is whether it was done cross culturally. Also whether the methodology is accounting for bias in the tests. If a constant gap appears in the IQ test (a dubious and misunderstood measure to begin with) I would then figure out what exactly the difference is and whether it is consistent across all cultures as to what the deficiency is. does it follow a predictable pattern? is it the result of test bias? excreta. once every attempt at refutation of the hypotheses you can think of fails then and only then can you make the tentative assertion that the data indicates a difference in test results and let others attempt replication of the study. what most idiots do is just do it once with a limited scope with no followup and say shit like women are less intelligent then men or this race is less intelligent the white people. or take a look a a scientific paper they don't understand and make stupid claims.

Also I think IQ tests were devised to measure what students were behind in class and needed extra help to catch up and are expected to change over time and they exhibit relationships with everything from neural degeneration to depression. hardly the thing you should go sticking around to make grand claims of abstract intelligence levels. It's merely a measure of current knowledge that changes rapidly with education and other such things not a permanent marker of the potential of anyone and anyone who says such a thing has no idea that they are talking about.
Logged
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."

"Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate to suffering"

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187438 on: October 13, 2017, 11:52:50 pm »

once every attempt at refutation of the hypotheses you can think of fails then and only then can you make the tentative assertion that the data indicates a difference in test results and let others attempt replication of the study.

Why would the "no difference" position be the automatic default? You haven't shown why "100% nurture" should be the null hypothesis at all, for data which shows a difference.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: October 14, 2017, 01:44:03 am by Reelya »
Logged

Gunner-Chan

  • Bay Watcher
  • *CYBERBIRD NOISES*
    • View Profile
Re: [Ye] Welcome to the bunzone nerd! (Happy thread)
« Reply #187439 on: October 14, 2017, 01:43:33 am »

I don't know why this apparently became the topic for this but... It's something that could go places so I'd rather you guys take it somewhere else.
Logged
Diamonds are combustable, because they are made of Carbon.
Pages: 1 ... 12494 12495 [12496] 12497 12498 ... 12541