5 ms·

I know this is such a controversial livewire of a topic and borderline taboo, but the evidence is pretty substantial. That being said, the intra-group variation

I know this is such a controversial livewire of a topic and borderline taboo, but the evidence is pretty substantial. That being said, the intra-group variation is also extremely substantial (IE the variation between genius/median in any particular group is simultaneously a) far more than median in one group and median in another group and b) far less than genius in one group vs genius in another group). All that being said, I think this contributes to rather than detracts from GP's comment. These "studies" (as with much of modern psychological "research") are so poorly designed so as to be meaningless, hence the replication crisis. I think they're actually worse than meaningless because they're misleading and create infohazards.

jncfhnb 1y ago
I disagree. It strongly detracts from the GP’s claim. If we see huge variation in intelligence scores intra group, that strongly suggests that there are social/cultural/environmental factors in play driving a large part of this. It may be true that some racial backgrounds offer an advantage; but there is no evidence to suggest that this advantage is materially large relative to many of the social structural drivers that are obvious. The subtext of the claim is not that a statistically significant effect exists. It’s that there is a big important difference in intelligence across races intrinsically derived from genetics. And there’s no compelling evidence to support that.
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  >If we see huge variation in intelligence scores intra group, that strongly suggests that there are social/cultural/environmental factors in play driving a large part of this. Correlation does not equal causation. Variation in genetics in a group can realistically be a factor as well. Three probable possibilities here: Only environment, Only genetics, both genetics and environment. Common sense says it's both genetics and environment. >It may be true that some racial backgrounds offer an advantage; but there is no evidence to suggest that this advantage is materially large relative to many of the social structural drivers that are obvious. I never commented how large this advantage was relative to the social driver. I agree with you... the social structure likely the greater driver. But the genetic driver is not insignificant. >The subtext of the claim is not that a statistically significant effect exists. It’s that there is a big important difference in intelligence across races intrinsically derived from genetics. And there’s no compelling evidence to support that. There is evidence. But there is huge political debate and attacks around the evidence. There are many studies that study IQ among races independent of environment and many of those studies show there is a statistically significant difference. Those studies suffer from the replication crisis, but so do all conflicting studies within psychology as well.
  - tptacek 1y ago
    Cite them. Let's see which ones you're talking about. We know there are studies that say what you say! But it's hard to engage when the studies themselves are abstractions.
    - ninetyninenine 1y ago
      I will. On a train rn. I can cite them tonight. Hopefully you’ll respond.
    - ninetyninenine 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - tptacek 1y ago
        Please don't dump ChatGPT stuff onto threads. It's specifically against the rules here. If your uncertainty was whether we could set up dueling ChatGPT sessions: we very definitely can.
        ninetyninenine 1y ago
        [flagged]
        tptacek 1y ago
        Sorry, but you're wrong about this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=generated%20by%3Atomhow&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=generated%20by%3Adang&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
        ninetyninenine 1y ago
        I disagree. This is not a hard rule. I'm willing to bet if the moderators saw this they would be ok with this instance of it. This would be the fault of the moderators for not directly putting it in the rules if that was the case. Though I doubt they'd be ok with this entire thread as it's heated and the topic is flamewar-like even though I tried to direct it in a different direction initially. It already went off the rails with the other guy once he told me I was dumb and trying to establish race superiority among asians. Too late. I think I'll get warned or banned. Anyway, I'm not disguising the content human generated. Additionally All I'm doing is asking the LLM to cite and summarize citations which you asked for. Manually finding those citations are tedious. My opinions and thoughts are still human written and not AI generated. What I find incredulous is that you have some problem with content that's AI generated even if it's actually true and even it's just flat summaries of citations. Like I told the LLM to find specific resources and summarize studies I have already seen so you don't have to go through the entire paper and you have a huge problem with that? Fine. You can just refuse to engage. Commenting on it is also "against the rules" per your link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44808351 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44808351 I mean if you want you can flag my post and vote it down. I think it's extreme and an ass hole move so I don't do that to people I have different opinions with. It's up to you.

jncfhnb 1y ago

I disagree. It strongly detracts from the GP’s claim. If we see huge variation in intelligence scores intra group, that strongly suggests that there are social/cultural/environmental factors in play driving a large part of this. It may be true that some racial backgrounds offer an advantage; but there is no evidence to suggest that this advantage is materially large relative to many of the social structural drivers that are obvious. The subtext of the claim is not that a statistically significant effect exists. It’s that there is a big important difference in intelligence across races intrinsically derived from genetics. And there’s no compelling evidence to support that.

ninetyninenine 1y ago
>If we see huge variation in intelligence scores intra group, that strongly suggests that there are social/cultural/environmental factors in play driving a large part of this. Correlation does not equal causation. Variation in genetics in a group can realistically be a factor as well. Three probable possibilities here: Only environment, Only genetics, both genetics and environment. Common sense says it's both genetics and environment. >It may be true that some racial backgrounds offer an advantage; but there is no evidence to suggest that this advantage is materially large relative to many of the social structural drivers that are obvious. I never commented how large this advantage was relative to the social driver. I agree with you... the social structure likely the greater driver. But the genetic driver is not insignificant. >The subtext of the claim is not that a statistically significant effect exists. It’s that there is a big important difference in intelligence across races intrinsically derived from genetics. And there’s no compelling evidence to support that. There is evidence. But there is huge political debate and attacks around the evidence. There are many studies that study IQ among races independent of environment and many of those studies show there is a statistically significant difference. Those studies suffer from the replication crisis, but so do all conflicting studies within psychology as well.
- tptacek 1y ago
  Cite them. Let's see which ones you're talking about. We know there are studies that say what you say! But it's hard to engage when the studies themselves are abstractions.
  - ninetyninenine 1y ago
    I will. On a train rn. I can cite them tonight. Hopefully you’ll respond.
  - ninetyninenine 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - tptacek 1y ago
      Please don't dump ChatGPT stuff onto threads. It's specifically against the rules here. If your uncertainty was whether we could set up dueling ChatGPT sessions: we very definitely can.
      - ninetyninenine 1y ago
        [flagged]
        tptacek 1y ago
        Sorry, but you're wrong about this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=generated%20by%3Atomhow&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=generated%20by%3Adang&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
        ninetyninenine 1y ago
        I disagree. This is not a hard rule. I'm willing to bet if the moderators saw this they would be ok with this instance of it. This would be the fault of the moderators for not directly putting it in the rules if that was the case. Though I doubt they'd be ok with this entire thread as it's heated and the topic is flamewar-like even though I tried to direct it in a different direction initially. It already went off the rails with the other guy once he told me I was dumb and trying to establish race superiority among asians. Too late. I think I'll get warned or banned. Anyway, I'm not disguising the content human generated. Additionally All I'm doing is asking the LLM to cite and summarize citations which you asked for. Manually finding those citations are tedious. My opinions and thoughts are still human written and not AI generated. What I find incredulous is that you have some problem with content that's AI generated even if it's actually true and even it's just flat summaries of citations. Like I told the LLM to find specific resources and summarize studies I have already seen so you don't have to go through the entire paper and you have a huge problem with that? Fine. You can just refuse to engage. Commenting on it is also "against the rules" per your link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44808351 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44808351 I mean if you want you can flag my post and vote it down. I think it's extreme and an ass hole move so I don't do that to people I have different opinions with. It's up to you.