This is a tech news website. I expect people that post their opinions here on Linux to know what apt get does.
There's a difference between knowing what apt get does and knowing why someone should prefer kubuntu-desktop that over the dozen or so competitor packages (this is Linux, after all) which purport to solve the same problems.
Are you willing to honestly vouch that if you have children, you will be impartial enough to say that you won't judge him "just because this person has been arrested and charged for sexual assault against minority and attempted murder" and allow your young children to be around this person alone?
I do have children, and I would answer that question honestly if it came up during jury selection. That is what you meant, right?
If he is not convicted, and perhaps even if he is, he may well still do all right in his career. See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...
My point is that there is nothing that is worth the same tomorrow as it does today. The value of anything can only be measured relative to other things that also fluctuate.
Gold and USD are worth exactly what the market thinks they're worth. Their value is not intrinsic. If it were, the military power behind the USD wouldn't be relevant.
Clearly, what determines IQ doesn't completely determine intelligence, but it does have the advantage of being objectively measurable.
Anything expressible as a number has the disadvantage that it can seem more precise or objective than it is. This is how we end up with homo economicus, organisations gaming the system to make arbitrary (but measurable!) targets seem better, stack ranking, etc.
For what it's worth, I think this is decent preliminary research, in the sense that it justifies spending the money on a better study.
I realize that relying on subject-reported data in studies is necessary in some cases, but I believe they could've done better than this.
Maybe they could have "done better", but they probably couldn't with the budget they had. The usual point of cheaper-and-lower-quality studies like this is to show why spending more money might be worthwhile.
BTW, since we're throwing out random theories: Mensa, as an organisation, is more attractive to people with a predisposition to mental illness. Highly intelligent people who are well-adjusted are less likely to join.
I don't know what the research is on this, but my default assumption is that money, like religion, tends to amplify the sort of person you are.
If you're a good person, money makes you very good. If you're a bad person, money makes you very bad. If you're an ignorant person, money makes you very ignorant. And so on.
Slashdot Mirror
Bitcoin paywall, presumably?
Or possibly LKML.
This is a tech news website. I expect people that post their opinions here on Linux to know what apt get does.
There's a difference between knowing what apt get does and knowing why someone should prefer kubuntu-desktop that over the dozen or so competitor packages (this is Linux, after all) which purport to solve the same problems.
FTFY
Now I'm wondering just how serious "slashdotting" was back in the day. By modern standards, it was probably nuthin'.
Besides the fact it makes no sense to have bombers on standby when we have plenty of missiles that'll do the job faster and easier, [...]
Err... isn't that exactly what the B52s are armed with: cruise missiles? Does the US even have any atomic bombs any more?
Someone hasn't read/seen Fail-Safe. Or Doctor Strangelove.
No, there were only two Superman films in that series. Just like how there were only three Indiana Jones films and only one Highlander film.
Nukes go way beyond military supremacy issues- into overkill. No pun intended.
That's no pun. You used the word "overkill" in its original and correct sense.
See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...
See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...
Are you willing to honestly vouch that if you have children, you will be impartial enough to say that you won't judge him "just because this person has been arrested and charged for sexual assault against minority and attempted murder" and allow your young children to be around this person alone?
I do have children, and I would answer that question honestly if it came up during jury selection. That is what you meant, right?
If he is not convicted, and perhaps even if he is, he may well still do all right in his career. See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...
I haven't read your fine constitution in a while, but I'm pretty sure there is no guaranteed right to good public relations.
There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer.
My point is that there is nothing that is worth the same tomorrow as it does today. The value of anything can only be measured relative to other things that also fluctuate.
Gold and USD are worth exactly what the market thinks they're worth. Their value is not intrinsic. If it were, the military power behind the USD wouldn't be relevant.
It's a small price to pay for never having a negative interest rate on bank deposits. I think.
Nothing has intrinsic store of value. Not USD, not gold, not anything.
The juxtaposition of this top-level comment with this reply sums up the recent history of Slashdot almost perfectly.
The sorry state of Trump-era Internet trolling almost makes me nostalgic for the GNAA.
It's at +2 now. The system works?
I bet that like me, your uid is 5 digits only because it was considered good etiquette to lurk for a while before commenting.
Anything expressible as a number has the disadvantage that it can seem more precise or objective than it is. This is how we end up with homo economicus, organisations gaming the system to make arbitrary (but measurable!) targets seem better, stack ranking, etc.
For what it's worth, I think this is decent preliminary research, in the sense that it justifies spending the money on a better study.
Unfortunately, my urine tested negative for "credulity about the scientific merit of IQ tests".
I realize that relying on subject-reported data in studies is necessary in some cases, but I believe they could've done better than this.
Maybe they could have "done better", but they probably couldn't with the budget they had. The usual point of cheaper-and-lower-quality studies like this is to show why spending more money might be worthwhile.
BTW, since we're throwing out random theories: Mensa, as an organisation, is more attractive to people with a predisposition to mental illness. Highly intelligent people who are well-adjusted are less likely to join.
I don't know what the research is on this, but my default assumption is that money, like religion, tends to amplify the sort of person you are.
If you're a good person, money makes you very good. If you're a bad person, money makes you very bad. If you're an ignorant person, money makes you very ignorant. And so on.