alchemist
11mo ago
For what it's worth, when I last saw this, the gap had grown immensely in the last 10 or 15 years. It was quite surprising, as I haven't really noticed it in German society (where I live, but I'm in a rich city).
Although I think I saw income inequality. The hope would be that it's somewhat reversible, as I think (too much) inequality is bad for a society. OTOH, I pay quite a lot in taxes already, so it's not too clear to me how thing will improve. Higher minimum wage / whatever Harz-4 is called now?
Sorry, didn't check your Twitter, as I'm not on it, and don't like it (and don't like following links just to know what someone's talking about; I do like them for references).
I guess if you stated clearly what you think contributes to IQ scores then perhaps we'd mostly agree. As I think you say, accounting for 8% variance would be not too far from noise. That still seems quite a bit too high to me, and I don't really see how you clearly quantify 'effort' but would think to myself -- "whatever, if you want to believe that, go ahead it doesn't seem wrong enough to be worth fighting over". What I read from your initial post is that effort was more important than everything else, which seemed clearly wrong. You gave this impression by not specifying how much effect you thought that it had, and by saying people claiming it didn't have an effect "obviously massively contradicts common sense," which is a very strong formulation.
FWIW, I expect a very asymptotic-type curve, that rises extremely sharply from [answered questions at random without reading them] to [did test pretty normally], and then is pretty flat. It's like (but not quite as extreme) saying the kind of pen you use matters, because if yours is broken, or breaks half-way through, you'll get a lower score. So effort is not very interesting. But sure somehow accounting for 4% of the variance is plausible (sorry, to me 8% really seems too high, I'd think how well I slept, the questions I got, my mood, time of day, my pencil, and a bunch of other things would play a larger role than nebulous 'effort'). You seemed to be implying that means IQ tests are meaningless (and apologies if I misread it, again, please stately plainly your point so that doesn't happen as often), which that doesn't seem like a strong argument for. If that's not what you're implying, what is your point in bringing up effort?
My first thought was that I agree with you. The second thought was that you can have a confidence in your confidence. My third thought was that that should baked into your primal estimation, and that if you're saying 80% +/- 20%, you're really saying something like 70%. Does it really make sense to be saying, hey, there's a chance I'm 99% sure, but it's only 10%??
These things really only make sense with repeated results anyway. A single event happens or it doesn't.
If you felt a real need to give more details on your prediction, I think it would be more interesting to give buckets, e.g. I expect the housing market to
5%: shrink > 15%
30%: shrink 5 - 15%
60%: stay flat, changing [-5, +5]
12%: grow 5 - 15%
3% grow > 15%
OTOH, thinking about this more (which makes me think that someone smarter and with more statistics has thought more about this), this still doesn't capture the idea of confidence. What if I don't know what a house is, and you ask me this? Can I really make any meaningful statement? I think I could say 50/50 grows or shrinks, or 90% doesn't change more than 95% (because few things do), but it's hard to capture what it means to have little certainty.
alchemist
1yr ago
Indonesian has that, and I always thought it was a super-useful concept.
alchemist
1yr ago
I liked the improvisational aspect of that, but it also highlights the core of the shows problem to me -- there isn't really a story, there is a sequence of things that happened. If elves are ninjas that can use chains and twigs, how did they get caught? Why do they run into close-quarters and get disembowelled by the Warg, rather than using the spear in their hands as a spear. Arondir sometimes seems a master warrior and other times not, and the other elves mainly seem to suck (except for that one brief moment).
And then Arondir 'loses', but gets set free anyway (Adar), where he gets in a fight, but they get free anyway (running in the forest with Theo), where the Orcs surround his town and attack him (pre Mt Doom) ... but they get free anyway. It made it hard to care, because nothing that happened in one scene (Arondir captured, Bronwyn hit by an arrow, Halbrand bedridden with a gut wound, Whatsishisname blowing up boats, Mt Doom exploding, The Numenoreans going to middle earth) has no effect on the later ones.
So you can't really set any expectations or feel for a story. You can watch the pretty pictures, but that's about it.
alchemist
1yr ago
I'll throw my 2c in the ring with "While it commits a number of the same flaws, RoP is way better than WoT". I'd give RoP a 5 or a 6 / 10 -- it looked very good (except for the armor, which, except for Galadriel's, looked like fake plastic armor you buy for your kids, IMO), and had some nice scenes (Adar, Elrond & Durin). I hard the Harfoots though, and for me the main problem is nothing really had consequences -- we just flowed from one set piece to the next. Also, the diverse casting wasn't too damaging for RoP, in my opinion, except for the Harfoots, where it really makes no sense.
WoT was a 2 or 3 / 10, where a number of "The Message" things really destroyed the whole story (and underlying system of magic and source of tension in the book).
I don't think I'll be watching Season 2 of either, unless the family makes me.
If Amazon is smart, they hurry Season 2 out, as I think otherwise most people will turn their back on RoP.
alchemist
1yr ago
Men seem to be willing to self-identify as women when it comes to prison, but yeah, otherwise it does seem more women -- I wonder if groups of men to to control that more aggressively than women?
alchemist
1yr ago
They seem to be painless. Speaking for fairly direct personal experience, you're essentially put to sleep, and then your heart stops. Direct witness reported seeing no distress (witness to Canadian euthanasia administrant).
alchemist
1yr ago
But she knew the path she was on was going to lead to hear death. At least in Canada, they ask you again before giving the final lethal injection, warning you there is no going back after it.
It seems she did successfully commit suicide, and in a way with a lot less terror than jumping off a bridge. Maybe (seriously) we should make people face that terror before they commit suicide (is that what you're proposing? "Show you really want it -- cut your hand off to prove it."), but I don't think so, personally.
alchemist
1yr ago
I've taken a beating, down 20-25% or so I'd say, mainly due to being seriously overweight in the tech sector (company stock), compounded by generally being tech bullish. I have some diversification, including some energy funds, so that's helped a bit, but not a lot. Still I'd gone up a lot over the last N years, so I can't really complain.
I have bought in a bit more occasionally on the way down, and considering doing more, but it will be slowly and carefully, no 3x ETFs you madman! For various tax reasons, it generally makes much more sense for me to buy single stocks now, which sucks (broad ETFs is the way to go!) so I'm looking at things like INTC, GOOG, APPL, MSFT, AMD, MRNA, BTI, BRK.B (those last two as counterweights to the tech heaviness).
alchemist
1yr ago
I think you could make an amazing adult series out of Malazan or the Black company, but the writing wouldn't be easy. The former is crazy complicated. The Lies of Lock Lamore could work too.
For kids ... I like someone else's idea of an animated series in the Harry Potter world. I haven't read them for a long time, but Dragonriders of Pern, Xanth, and the Riftwar saga seem good. A more modern source would be The Ranger's Apprentice series.
Apparently Percy Jackson was good, but very poorly done as a movie, so that would be an option too.
alchemist
1yr ago
Ha! I'll make sure to pass it along ;), but sadly, it does not appear that that is what they meant...
Is there a summary of that anywhere? I seem to have missed it. Was it something in the SciFi community?
*Thanks y'all, that was a wild ride.
alchemist
1yr ago
Doesn't that lead one to wonder: "How did the Patriarchy ever gain power?" Are men just better at organizing? Women were too nice? But doesn't that suggest general differences between men & women.
It's an incoherent (and inconsistent with science and trivial observation) viewpoint.
alchemist
1yr ago
Nice! And ha, that sounds like a weird variant of rubber-duck-debugging.
At least you know at least one user appreciates it!
alchemist
11mo ago
The short form for me (okay, happily married, not in the dating pool, but reasonably charismatic), is that you can't trust / believe what 95% of women say. The saying is "Ask a fisherman, not fish, how to catch fish".
Most women seem generally unwilling or unable to introspect when it comes to attraction, or feel they can't be honest about it. So they say the usual platitudes like "be yourself!" "don't try, it'll happen!" "don't try to treat me differently" "just be nice!". Hollywood is just awful.
I was a late bloomer. My success took off when I just started going for it -- leaning in for the kiss, just making things happen, taking things a step further. I admit, this is all a while ago, so it's possible it's all changed, but I think it's human nature, so I rather doubt it.
In terms of your "how much interest to show", I think the answer is, show interest -- you want this -- but don't be creepy, i.e. if she's not interested, no big deal, you'll move onto the next thing.
My take -- be genuinely interested in her, and make her feel special. Do interesting things, and be willing to be a bit traditionally masculine (be competent, show initiative, be strong).
Good luck -- modern dating seems like a messed-up, sad, confused scene. Try to straighten it, and not get sucked in by the bullshit that's been painted on top recently.
alchemist
11mo ago
While I mostly agree with you, I think there are also tipping points that are bad -- things like the great depression, which fucked up the whole world for a decade, the oil crisis in the 70s, and the financial crisis in 2008. It does seem like we've gotten better at handling things, but part of me worries that we've been lulled into a false sense of security.
Minor related note -- I'd say only now, a good year after the initial Ukraine invasion, has the product offering in supermarkets mostly levelled out. Until recently, it seemed like there was always something out -- sunflower oil, catfood, dijon senf (that was something else), what have you. So my sense is that we are more connected, and have less resilience, so an unexpected shock can have surprising ripples.
I still tend towards optimism, but I don't think we can just rely on things working out.
alchemist
1yr ago
There's also the attacking of free speech as a principle, the mockery of "Well Akshually", the attacking of "just asking questions" or playing devils advocate (you're derailing!). So there's a whole bunch of anti-heresy mechanisms in place.
alchemist
1yr ago
Jesus, on r/ comics there are regular comics that I guess are intended to be "slice of life" from a woman and there is nothing funny or enlightening about them at all. It's "wow airplane food sucks" level stuff, and it keeps getting upvoted, and I don't understand that at all. Even on reddit, I really don't understand it -- there's just nothing remotely funny.
(Seriously, if someone likes them, I'd be interested to know why, each time I read one I just kind of shake my head, and feel incredibly out of touch.)
alchemist
1yr ago
But can you believe what they say? In dating topics, the answer is usually "no," although I agree, I suspect men are over-estimating the attraction here.
alchemist
1yr ago
Really? It makes sense, so to speak, from an evolutionary standpoint, in that one male can impregnate many females, so a species can afford to produce a bunch of 'waste' men, as long as some turn out well. It's like VC investing in companies. Women, on the other hand, cannot be easily replaced -- if a tribe loses half its women, it loses half its next generation, more or less. If it loses half its men, it has labour and fighting problems, but no problems producing enough children.
There's also the detail that women have two XX chromosomes, but men have an X & Y. That's why many diseases hit men more frequently (e.g. color blindness), because they only need one defective X chromosome for it to hit. Similarly, if they get a helpful mutation, it isn't drowned out by the partner gene.
And for what it's worth, apparently you do see more male variance in the world, although I think in the mental domains it's not as clear-cut.
alchemist
1yr ago
Ha, I was just thinking the same thing! I'd love to only be done 10%. I'm around 25%; it has moved retirement dates out somewhat.
alchemist
1yr ago
Both, but they are separate.
Being obese is a pretty big hit (for most people, but there are always exception) to attractiveness. But the original point was how hard young women have it to be attractive, because they have to spend time and money on fashion, and doing make-up is hard, and not being fat is really hard. I was disagreeing with all of those, especially the last one, which is what caused this comment chain.
While I'm not sure your exact proposal is the way, I do think inheritance taxes are both a good way to reduce inequality, and are also, honestly, democratic (even playing field). That said, they do go against human nature to give something to your kids, so I think you need to be careful. (Yes, I know trusts are a standard way to work around them; it seems like if this is known, a counter-play should be possible). I say this as someone intending to leave something (but not too much :D) to his kids.
Agreement on the expensive real estate. Also, especially anything more than a single home should be hit fairly hard, IMO.
More options
Context Copy link