4 ms·

> Children who score [IQ]145 or above would then be offered a life-long genius award. > They could start at, say $75,000 a year and go up by $25,000 increments

by htag 4y ago

> Children who score [IQ]145 or above would then be offered a life-long genius award. > They could start at, say $75,000 a year and go up by $25,000 increments every decade. The payments could expire if our geniuses decided to take paid employment but then resume if they decided to “drop out” again. 1. I don't think UBI expires, this is more like unemployment benefit which include perverse incentives against employment. 2. IQ is a controversial measurement. It's validity is questionable. It's been used or purposed to be used for truly horrible state sponsored actions in the past. I have a bias against using it for discrimination across populations, simply because of it's history and proponents over the years.

cgb223 4y ago
> Children who score [IQ]145 or above would then be offered a life-long genius award. Sounds like it would create MASSIVE incentives to cheat on the IQ test or pay off the graders to give you a good score as well It would literally set your kids up for life
- neilv 4y ago
  Also, it doesn't have to be overt "cheating": I suspect that whatever metric(s) would be both defined and gamed by the affluent, like college admissions criteria.
- torstenvl 4y ago
  This is the only cogent criticism I can find in this thread. I'm predisposed to like the proposal, but I don't really have a good response for you. On the other hand, don't most IQ tests have elaborate anti-cheating mechanisms? E.g., handwriting an ungraded written portion?
  - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
    You insinuate you have a high IQ and that is the only cogent critisms you can find here.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - BitwiseFool 4y ago
    That sounds a lot more like the SAT. That was also supposed to have anti-cheating measures and be resistant to the practice effect. Yet, students who take SAT prep often end up scoring higher (but dramatically higher) than those that did not take such prep courses. It seems perfectly plausible that repeatedly taking IQ tests would likely result in a higher score due to practice and familiarity. Especially if there is a significant financial incentive involved and someone is on the border of qualifying for it.
    - torstenvl 4y ago
      LSAT does this as well, and it's generally accepted as an IQ test rather than a knowledge test. I'm not concerned with trainability. Lots of minimum bars are trainable, like the bar exam, or the Marine Corps PFT/IST. The fact that they're trainable doesn't mean the measures are invalid w/r/t minimum competence as a lawyer, or minimum fitness as a Marine. Similarly, I don't think trainability on tests of logical reasoning, pattern recognition, reading comprehension, memory, etc. necessarily meaningfully reduces the effectiveness of the tests that measure such things. On the contrary, I think it shows that intelligence increases when exercised.
rendall 4y ago
> "IQ is a controversial measurement. It's validity is questionable." IQ is the most reproducible finding in psychology and psychometrics by far.
- mgrthrow 4y ago
  It's also one of the most poisoned by history. It has, for instance, been used in eugenics movements and forced sterilizations in the US. It is influenced by all sorts of factors, from parental income to nutrition. My family has folks in psych, and they universally regard IQ as "pretty bad, but useful for roughly measuring one form of intelligence".
  - lostmsu 4y ago
    > It's also one of the most poisoned by history. It has, for instance, been used in eugenics movements and forced sterilizations in the US. What a weird line of reasoning. So are rocket propulsion, gold, and English language.
    - casualrandomcom 4y ago
      rocket propulsion has been used in forced sterilizations?
      - mgrthrow 4y ago
        It was developed as a weapon. I guess the parent is saying IQ tests are also a weapon that has found some not weapon uses?
- delecti 4y ago
  IQ tests reliably measure IQ, where "IQ" is the name of the metric invented to describe what IQ tests measure.
  - hbrn 4y ago
    And yet it strongly correlates with tons of other meaningful metrics, like work success and income.
SirLJ 4y ago
Even as a High IQ person, if someone gave me this kind of money as a teenager, I would have spent half on liquor and wild women and the other half, I would have wasted…
Animats 4y ago
> IQ is a controversial measurement. Its' validity is questionable. There's a loud chorus saying that. Mostly they're making excuses for some racial group not doing well.
- casualrandomcom 4y ago
  Stephen Jay Gould wasn't making excuses.
jwatt 4y ago
Lex Fridman had an interesting podcast on IQ a few months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hppbxV9C63g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hppbxV9C63g

by htag 4y ago

cgb223 4y ago

> Children who score [IQ]145 or above would then be offered a life-long genius award. Sounds like it would create MASSIVE incentives to cheat on the IQ test or pay off the graders to give you a good score as well It would literally set your kids up for life

neilv 4y ago
Also, it doesn't have to be overt "cheating": I suspect that whatever metric(s) would be both defined and gamed by the affluent, like college admissions criteria.
torstenvl 4y ago
This is the only cogent criticism I can find in this thread. I'm predisposed to like the proposal, but I don't really have a good response for you. On the other hand, don't most IQ tests have elaborate anti-cheating mechanisms? E.g., handwriting an ungraded written portion?
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
  You insinuate you have a high IQ and that is the only cogent critisms you can find here.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  That sounds a lot more like the SAT. That was also supposed to have anti-cheating measures and be resistant to the practice effect. Yet, students who take SAT prep often end up scoring higher (but dramatically higher) than those that did not take such prep courses. It seems perfectly plausible that repeatedly taking IQ tests would likely result in a higher score due to practice and familiarity. Especially if there is a significant financial incentive involved and someone is on the border of qualifying for it.
  - torstenvl 4y ago
    LSAT does this as well, and it's generally accepted as an IQ test rather than a knowledge test. I'm not concerned with trainability. Lots of minimum bars are trainable, like the bar exam, or the Marine Corps PFT/IST. The fact that they're trainable doesn't mean the measures are invalid w/r/t minimum competence as a lawyer, or minimum fitness as a Marine. Similarly, I don't think trainability on tests of logical reasoning, pattern recognition, reading comprehension, memory, etc. necessarily meaningfully reduces the effectiveness of the tests that measure such things. On the contrary, I think it shows that intelligence increases when exercised.

rendall 4y ago

> "IQ is a controversial measurement. It's validity is questionable." IQ is the most reproducible finding in psychology and psychometrics by far.

mgrthrow 4y ago
It's also one of the most poisoned by history. It has, for instance, been used in eugenics movements and forced sterilizations in the US. It is influenced by all sorts of factors, from parental income to nutrition. My family has folks in psych, and they universally regard IQ as "pretty bad, but useful for roughly measuring one form of intelligence".
- lostmsu 4y ago
  > It's also one of the most poisoned by history. It has, for instance, been used in eugenics movements and forced sterilizations in the US. What a weird line of reasoning. So are rocket propulsion, gold, and English language.
  - casualrandomcom 4y ago
    rocket propulsion has been used in forced sterilizations?
    - mgrthrow 4y ago
      It was developed as a weapon. I guess the parent is saying IQ tests are also a weapon that has found some not weapon uses?
delecti 4y ago
IQ tests reliably measure IQ, where "IQ" is the name of the metric invented to describe what IQ tests measure.
- hbrn 4y ago
  And yet it strongly correlates with tons of other meaningful metrics, like work success and income.

SirLJ 4y ago

Even as a High IQ person, if someone gave me this kind of money as a teenager, I would have spent half on liquor and wild women and the other half, I would have wasted…

Animats 4y ago

> IQ is a controversial measurement. Its' validity is questionable. There's a loud chorus saying that. Mostly they're making excuses for some racial group not doing well.

casualrandomcom 4y ago
Stephen Jay Gould wasn't making excuses.

jwatt 4y ago

Lex Fridman had an interesting podcast on IQ a few months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hppbxV9C63g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hppbxV9C63g