4 ms·
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis The other statements I think are false. Men dominate
by etrabroline 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
The other statements I think are false. Men dominate in high IQ areas because more men are high IQ because of the Variability Hypothesis. It has nothing to do with being "winner take all". I'm not really sure what that means.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y agoThe wiki article seems pretty inconclusive.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- patmcc 5y agoI think "winner take all" refers to certain areas, where being 20% better than a competitor can bring you 80% of the market share. (I'm not sure if this is an accurate way to view the world, but I think that's what OP was getting at)
- eindiran 5y agoI think the claim about "winner take all" games is about things which follow power law distributions. If a large fraction of all possible rewards go to a small fraction of participants, its not too out there to imagine a small number of extreme outliers dominating. Lots of things appear to work this way; eg income or number of streams to songs or book sales. Relating this back to OP's point, almost everything where network interactions come into play appears to be power law distributed, due to the Chinese restaurant process[0]. So as the world scales, we see the effects of power law distributions for larger and larger networks. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_restaurant_process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_restaurant_process