SneerClub

983 readers

28 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

LessWrong: video games > IQ tests (www.lesswrong.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Video games also have potential legal advantages over IQ tests for companies. You could argue that "we only hire people good at video games to get people who fit our corporate culture of liking video games" but that argument doesn't work as well for IQ tests.

yet again an original post title that self-sneers

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@mind @sneerclub Here’s the problem: that study DID NOT show that IQ could “predict” anything. It showed a CORRELATION but that’s a totally different thing. IQ is not determinative or causative of anything, because it is an entirely synthetic metric whose measurement is based on unproven and essentially unprovable theory.

The concept of “Innate General Intelligence” which IQ purports to quantify is the phlogiston of psychology.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@grumpybozo @mind @sneerclub Correlations by definition are predictive, my friend. You could argue that the predictive effect doesn't generalize to other datasets, but the burden of proof is definitely on you to show that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

yeah, tthis guy's on the wrong lemmy