jwmgregory
people aren’t downvoting you emotionally. they just very much disagree with the notion of an individual owning intellectual property, and the idea that copyright somehow spurs innovation instead of snuffing it.
at the time, they honestly did.
you guys are fucking crazy. ukrainian government knows there’s a very tangible and real possibility of defeat, or at the least concessions to russia during negotiations. do you really think it is in their best interests to let the kremlin make claims about ukrainian acts of terror during that stage?? like it or not, the world isnt some fucking equitable, fair fairy tale. russia has significantly more bargaining power here. they can afford ukraine making such claims, that doesn’t matter. on the flip side, ukraine cannot.
not to double reply to you but the issue here isn’t training versus not training for the test; the issue is that psychiatrist and psychologist can’t rotely sort out what influences “training” and other activities actually had on the results of the test versus what a theoretical, “pure” test result would’ve been. frankly i’d imagine different psychologist in different context would want to control for this in a variety of ways. maybe in one experiment, telling the population not to train is the best way to get at the data you want. but for the most part? no. absolutely not. the claim that telling people to not train or study for an IQ test somehow is a be all end all control for wanton influences & noise in IQ results is total bunk. think about this. what even qualifies as studying for an IQ test? is the teenage boy incidentally studying for his ACT’s at the same time as a population IQ test, who consequently scored higher than the median average for his age range, cheating or invalid in his results? most people and psychology studies would likely say no, not really. this demonstrates some of the fundamental flaws in IQ and g-factor that psychologists have to recognize while working with them. there’s truly no real way to sort out what is “cheating/invalidating” on an IQ test versus what data is potentially legitimate. because objectively speaking, what IQ measures is incredibly subjective. on top of all that, either way, it’s impossible and impractical to try and control for every single thing people do in their daily lives.
EDIT: stray “a” removed
the video annoys you because you’re not the target audience. you clearly already see validity in IQ as a metric and have use cases for it. most STEM people (veritasium’s audience writ large) do not traditionally view IQ favorably, and at worst consider it a worthless bunk metric. the video isn’t intended to say “hey! here’s how psychiatrist and psychologist view and use IQ in statistical analysis and their work (bc remember, STEM people know about this legitimate use in these fields, they just typically discount or look down upon it due to IQ’s reputation),” it’s intended to say “hey! i know you don’t think IQ is real/valid, but here is a video essay exploring the concept through a very STEM lense.” of course he talks about taking the test and studying for it. he talks about taking the test blind too. he’s a fucking engineer, physicist, and doctor. the exact kind of person to recognize what tools like IQ metrics actually are, and that there is no single one way to measure, use, or quantify this data that’s more “correct” than others, when divorced from context. veritasium demonstrated a very thorough understanding of the actual concepts and theoretical principles that underlie IQ, and I thought his video was a very fresh perspective. it certainly demonstrated a mastery of the concept that i believe is absent from someone who might hold the opinions you’re espousing here (genuinely don’t mean to come off as rude here sorry for having autism energy)
not to resurrect a dead thread but yeah anyone remotely into computer science should be able to read pseudo code notation. it being variable in how people write it is part of what makes it a nice tool. this code could work in many contexts in many languages. it’s pretty precise for pseudo code, even.
this is exactly what i’m describing, sorry hazy memory.
this works to disable gestures but doesn’t seem to work like apollo where the screen space for navigation gestures is much wider than with the gestures
most software will let you search specific strings. so like, “Will” != “will”
frankly that plus what the other guy’s comment said, this seems like a non-issue that you’re kind of responsible for if you just decide to seek no solution and truck through the significant extra labor.
this literally only hassles the restaurant workers who now have to remake the entire order bc some fuckwits decided they’re too good to use the queue properly