Linux-Advocacy Digest #722, Volume #32 Fri, 9 Mar 01 12:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: What does IQ measure? (turtoni)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Anonymous)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux destroys video card! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What does IQ measure? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Brock Hannibal)
Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision (Bob Hauck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: turtoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:27:33 -0500
Brock Hannibal wrote:
> turtoni wrote:
> >
> > Scott Gardner wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 08 Mar 2001 13:42:44 -0500, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually, those in the top centiles of IQ marry MORE often...especially
> > > >the men. The difference is...just like everything else they do...they
> > > >do so INTELLIGENTLY.
> > >
> > > This threw me for a loop at first. I was wondering why, if they marry
> > > so intelligently, they're doing it "more often" (ie, repeatedly). Of
> > > course I realize what you meant was that people in the top percentiles
> > > of IQ are more likely to be married... Was still good for a laugh in
> > > my moment of confusion...
> >
> > personally i would put forward that it's been my observation that people who
> > are highly skilled in some areas tend to be lacking in others.
>
> My observations are just the opposite of yours. My observation is
> that people that are highly skilled are also good at other things if
> they put their minds to them.
i'm thinking that be being highly skilled in certain area's it's more likely that
you might be lacking in others, given that you might have not had the time to put
your mind to them. but sure yeah if you put your mind to the areas of deficiency
you'd probably be able to improve those abilities.
> > we can only
> > just take a look at the sample of very successful people within the media
> > only to watch them make a complete mess of their personal life's and fail at
> > being able to form successful long term successful relationships.
>
> Actors and actresses are not picked because of their high IQ.
i dont' believe that having a hi iq collates to having a successful long term
relationship.
in fact it might be likely to be for the opposite. ignorance is bliss and all
that.
perhaps even having a long term relationship isn't intelligent.
> > in fact you might say even go so far as to say that the the least successful
> > people are more likely to stay together for economic reasons and also more
> > likely to go with the flow and build large families, also for economic
> reasons.
>
> I don't think statistics bear that out.
i think they do. i think the middle class are more likely to have smaller families
than their counterparts.
> > so if we were to imagine that being intelligent is genetic
>
> There's no imagine to it.
most people have the ability to be intelligent imo.
> > and that those
> > people are more likely to be constantly putting one's self on the line and
> > therefore more likely to die out.
>
> I would think they, being smarter, would take fewer stupid risks
> actually, statistically, and maybe get better health care, eat right
> and so on.
are the stupid more than likely to lead a sheltered life? and not take many risks.
and the intelligent to lead a more exciting risky life?
> > we should therefore be on a downward
> > spiral intellectually which just imo hasn't been proven to be the case.
>
> No, because the scenario you've constructed is likely an erroneous
> one, at least as to causality.
why would the majority of mediocre not overrun the excellent minority over a few
generations?
> > i think what it spells out is that we all have a capacity to be intelligent
> > and that it just needs to be turned on
>
> There are innate differences in the factors which contribute to high
> IQ. They are generally present and detectable by testing at very
> young ages.
don't the young develop at differing speeds? they certainly do physically and
quite dramatically too.
> > whilst it's also true to say that
> > some people have some abnormality which gives them a drive and/or makes them
> > more likely to be what society considers to as define success.
>
> Motivation and intelligence, while linked, are not as tightly
> correlated as one might think.
but to be considered intelligent you would have to develop those test skills by
which to be judged.
because you haven't developed them doesn't necessarily mean you are less
intelligent.
> > and i also believe we have become more civilized and that life expectancy
> > has greatly improved but we are still essentially the same monkey as our
> > distant ancestor.
>
> We just hire out killin' done instead of doin' it ourselves. When's
> the last time you went out and killed a large herbivore, gutted,
> skinned and butchered it to feed your family? But you think nothin'
> of buyin' a steak dinner, the cost of which includes payment for all
> those dirty jobs you don't want to do.(That's the general you, not
> you specifically Ian)
i'm taking about psychologically we are the same thing.
> > turtoni - but there is room for radical movement, imo.
>
> You'd be right there.
turtoni - jeem will lead us to a new age of keggerness.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:36:22 -0500
"." wrote:
>
> > > The point I was trying
> > > to make is that there is often more than one solution to a problem,
> >
> > Well, duh.
>
> *yawn* good point.
>
> > Yes that's true enough, but why would the lower IQ score person be
> > more or less likely than the higher IQ score person to pick the
> > better, but slower and non-obvious way? Or are you constructing a
> > mythical scenario that's pretty damned unlikely?
>
> I'm not constructing any scenario. My goal is not to prove that IQ tests
> do or don't work. Basically I believe that sort of thing can't be proven
> currently... it's entirely possible that in the next ten years someone
> will step forward with some observation that completely disproves
> everything we have ever thought was fact about intelligence.
>
> MY point is that the smarter person will consider more than one possible
> solution before choosing a course of action (where applicable, of
> course).
And the REALLY smart person will evaluate all of those possible solutions,
and select the best one before the dimwit comes up with even one
solution.
For example....there many people who have HUNDREDS of patents to
their names...while many many others don't even have the mental
capacity to even understand what the hell the problem entails, let
alone *EVER* (as in, over the course of their ENTIRE several
decades-long life) formulating even a partial solution.
>
> > OK, let's make it a word problem that requires the solution of a
> > differential equation then. What then? Is it likely the lower IQ
> > person will come up with the "better" solution? Or once again are
> > you just constructing a fantasy story to try to refute the validity
> > of IQ tests?
>
> Picking questions with only one correct answer doesn't even start to deal
> with the point I was making. Why don't you stretch your mind a little
> further and think beyond questions that have one single definitive
> answer? Someone else posted a story about a ball stuck in the rafters
> and a pile of bricks. There's a nice simple starting point.
Dwelling on ex post facto specifications for a solution is NOT victory.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 09:40:27 -0700
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
aaron wrote:
> If you were to follow around one IQ-100 person all day, you would
> be appalled by the vast number of incredibly stupid things they do
> in the course of a day, and how many completely fucking obvious
> connections they miss, how many winning opportunities they pass
> up (because they either don't understand them, or they fail to
> even recognize that the opportunity exists in the first place).
now you know why i usually don't read your messages
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
p.s. windows is a pretty cool operating system
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:42:28 -0500
Ian Davey wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Danimal
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> > logical/analytical style intelligence, but intelligence is far more wide
> >> > ranging than that. I'm not sure human intelligence can truly be measured by
> >> > groupings of checkboxes, if it were that easy we would have created
> >> > intelligent machines long ago,
> >
> >We can measure the mass of the Sun. Can we create another Sun?
> >
> >We can measure Bill Gates' net worth. Can the person who does
> >this become as rich as Bill Gates?
> >
> >You can count the number of characters in an MD5 checksum. Can
> >you reproduce the original document from that?
>
> So, if we can create a machine that can score highly at IQ tests then we have
> created an intelligent machine?
>
It depends.
Is it based upon merely looking up the question in a pre-stored database
and regurgitating an answer? If so, then that's no more intelligent
than teaching a semi-literate IQ-85 person to do the same thing.
> ian.
>
> \ /
> (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
> /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
> | |
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux destroys video card!
Date: 9 Mar 2001 16:42:12 GMT
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 14:08:47, Henry_Barta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> . . . I operated my firewall for 4
> weeks after the hard drive failed. I shut it down to put a
> spare drive. Barring loss of power, it sppeared to be ready
> to run indefinitely. (Running Linux, of course. I don't think
> that any Win based system would tolerate excessive hard drive
> failures and keep running.)
>
Interesting. Linux and the firewall continued operating from ram for 4
weeks. I'm curious, how did you know the hd failed and when did it
fail? Did you have a bare-bones Linux install just to run the hd?
--
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:59:29 -0500
Ian Davey wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Actually, as explained in the Scientific American article, this is
> >an element of "social graces" which is ENTIRELY independant of the
> >intelligence factor "g"
>
> I'll have to read that article, don't have time now unfortunately.
>
> >Also, this is an example of the "street smarts" phenomenon. Those
> >who find themselves in fucked-up situtations on a regular basis tend
> >to have stock-solutions to get themselves out of it....
>
> What about those with low IQ that aren't street smart and don't have
> experience to fall back on? Are you suggesting that people with high IQ are
> poor at applying that intelligence in real life situations?
No. I'm saying that prior repititious experience, resulting in a large
amount of "trial and error" data which one has personally (and
usually PAINFULLY acquired) is always a distinct advantage. The
person with 'street smarts' is NOT seeing the problem for the first
time...what is implied by "street smarts" is VAST amounts of prior
experience.
10 years of experience with even modest intelligence will always
beat ZERO experience and hi IQ when you only have 2-3 seconds to
make a life-or-death decision.
Now...let's compare IQ-100 with 10 years of experience to acquire
"street smarts" vs IQ-150 and only 3 years to acquire the same
sort of "street smarts"
Who would YOU bet on?
>
> >http://www.sciam.com/specialissues/1198intelligence/1198gottfred.html
>
> I'll try and have a look at this when I've got a spare moment.
>
> >See also "The Bell Curve" by Murray and Herrnstein.
>
> Interesting, but fundamentally flawed and overly simplistic. The conclusions
Oh really. Name one CREDIBLE source who disagrees with Murray and Hernstein.
Stephen Jay Gould, Jesse Jackson, Dan Rather, and other leftists with
an axe to grind and who do NOT--I say again ***DO** **NOT**--conduct
research inton intelligence are ***NOT*** credible sources of refutation.
> are far too generic considering how many factors have to be taken into
> account. Lot's of others in the same field disagree so you can hardly offer it
> as definative proof.
No...actually, EVERYBODY "IN THE SAME FIELD" agrees.
Those who disagree are people like:
a) Stephen Jay Gould (biologist and noted leftist, NOT* an intelligence
researcher).
b) Rep. Maxine Waters (D Florida), Famous for asking if the Mars lander could
be driven to where the astronouts planted the flag(*), and
noted leftist supporter of the Daniel Ortega and the other
Sandanistas who were terrorizing the populace in Nicaragua
...NOT an intelligence reseracher.
(*) Clue for the goddamned terminally clueless:
The Apollo missions went to the MOON, not Mars
c) Various news anchors (pretty-boy script readers with a penchant for
disseminating leftist propaganda...and NOT intelligence researchers).
None of the above are credible sources, because
1) they are NOT intelligence researchers
2) they all have a political agenda which is damaged by the truth
uncovered by intelligence researchers.
>
> ian.
>
> \ /
> (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
> /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
> | |
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 08:59:14 -0800
From: Brock Hannibal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 08 Mar 2001 01:32:23 GMT, Brent R wrote:
> > >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> > >>
> >
> > >JD Salinger had an IQ score of 115, still above average but not showing
> > >his true ability. To some the man is a complete genius. I also so a show
>
> To others, the man is a laughing stock who's out of his league, and
> should consider himself lucky to have ever been near the White House.
> Some of those people even think the JFK was not well-served by having
> a man of such meager abilities on the White House staff.
I think you are confusing JD Salinger, the reclusive author of "Catcher
in the Rye", with Pierre Salinger, former white house press secretary
under JFK.
--
Brock
"One thing counts in this life: Get them to sign
on the line which is dotted...A. Always. B. Be.
C. Closing. Always Be Closing."
http://www.swingout.net/party/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 17:04:15 GMT
On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 09:19:52 GMT, Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Microsoft's .NET technologies will allow producers of content to
> specify exactly how that content may be used--including whether it may
> be viewed one or x times, copied, printed, stored, etc. The consumer
> will have a lot of choice in how they pay for that content. This is
> our idea of balance in a world where fair use will become pratically
> irrelevant.
It would seem that MS thinks that the PC is dead, at least as far as
growth is concerned. They are apparently trying to become some kind of
consumer electronics software emporium, witness the X-box and the .NET
content control misfeatures you're talking about. They see a lot of
money to be made in satisfying the entertainment industry's wants.
Free Software is a bad thing in this context, not because of a direct
threat to profits, but as a threat to the business model MS and their
friends in the entertainment industry are trying to create. That model
is, basically, "pay per play". Big Brother isn't the government, it is
the RIAA and MPAA, with MS acting as the Ministry of Truth.
In combination with Jim Allchin's statements on the GPL and the MPAA
attack on DeCSS, it seems to me that there is an effort already underway
to paint Free Software users and developers as criminals. To link Free
Software to "hacking" and "piracy". Free Software just can't be
tolerated, since if open source code becomes the norm it will be really
hard to force people to go along with the new restrictions.
I do wonder, though, if the various interests involved in creating this
wonderful new world might be overreaching. Joe User is going to be
righteously pissed off when he finds out that the RIAA takes a dollar
out of his bank account every time he copies an MP3 and MS bills him
when he writes an email to mom using Word 2010. At some point I think
you can underestimate the intelligence of the consumer.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
