runarberg

1480 ms·

3991.
by runarberg 7y ago
> My bigger question is when the political split is more like 80/20 case should the 20 be guaranteed representation? Yes they should. They should get around 20% of the representatives.
3992.
by runarberg 7y ago
> In general the spread operator should only be used for forwarding arguments not for array operations. Not quite. You should also use the spread operator when you are spreading an iterable into an array: const unique = [...new Set
3993.
by runarberg 7y ago
I am not an expert. But it seems less likely since the Neanderthals existed for a shorter timespan over shorter distances then modern humans, so they must have encountered fewer hominin along their way. If anything it is more likely that th
3994.
by runarberg 7y ago
No I don’t claim that (even though Taleb might have; didn’t read him thoroughly enough). I say that there is a (muddy) threshold where these tests become useless. They still hold predictive power, but what they do predict is useless.
3995.
by runarberg 7y ago
No, what most people refer to as races of humans are a set of traits that are surprisingly shared across populations, albeit in different quantities. The traits that we’ve inherited from our archaic ancestors aren’t really the types of trai
3996.
by runarberg 7y ago
> Isn't this an example of cherry-picking outliers in an attempt to refute the overarching rule? I don’t believe that is the case. I think all we need to do is show that a race categorization is neither necessary nor sufficient in o
3997.
by runarberg 7y ago
When people talk about race, they are usually talking about a population or a set of traits commonly found within a population. For example, populations with a high degree of Irish descendants have a higher then average set of a few noticea
3998.
by runarberg 7y ago
By “wide ranging utility” you mean “detecting and diagnosing mental disabilities” right? If not: Using IQ for anything else is, at best, quite useless, and at worst, severely problematic as you found out when you heard about scientific raci
3999.
by runarberg 7y ago
Again (this has been stated several times in this thread). Intelligence tests are useful to detect and diagnose mental disabilities. What we (and Taleb) are questioning is the usefulness of above average IQs. I don’t know why you are all
4000.
by runarberg 7y ago
If you want to measure wealth it would be easier to ask their income. But you brought up the same point as the parent. 0 IQ correlates perfectly with death. Really low IQs correlate perfectly with mental disabilities. High IQs correlate (al
4001.
by runarberg 7y ago
> IQ is the most replicated and reliable measure in all of psychometrics This is not a high barrier to pass. Psychometrics is a field notorious for employing biased and non-existing constructs. Just because it is well studied, doesn’t ma
4002.
by runarberg 7y ago
They also use personality tests to screen out job applicants, and that is no argument for their usefulness. I mean you could hire only libras and claim that this policy has given you better candidates, and you would not be wrong. But at the
4003.
by runarberg 7y ago
> you can engineer the backhoe with an IQ of 120 I think this requires rephrasing: The fact you _can_ engineer the backhoe, means you have a higher then average IQ. The fact you have the engineering degree and education required gives y
4004.
by runarberg 7y ago
By IQ 20 you hardly have any mental capabilities at par with other humans, and you didn’t need the intelligence test to see that (and if you did, you didn’t need to summarize the IQ for the diagnosis). However if you go the same number of s
4005.
by runarberg 7y ago
You’re not wrong. IQ (or more generally intelligence tests) are very useful to diagnose people with some mental disabilities. That said: a) the IQ part of the intelligence test is sort of unnecessary for that purpose, and b) That’s usually
4006.
by runarberg 7y ago
`for ... of` only iterate over objects that implement `Symbol.iterator`. Native objects don’t do that by default, so `_.forEach` is more useful the `for ... of` even if you are only targeting modern browsers and not compiling the code dow
4007.
by runarberg 7y ago
> Your comment is how things "should work", but really not how they do. At least in the U.S. Since this is a comment on a thread about the possibility of building the infrastructure required for highway lanes reserved for auto
4008.
by runarberg 7y ago
From your situation it seems like the system in place that provide alternatives to driving could benefit from being expanded, increased, and optimized. I hope your local politicians agree with me that expenditures going into making these a
4009.
by runarberg 7y ago
The counter argument that you are not entertaining is precisely the argument that you should entertain. This behavior is called tit for tat and it is often the optimal strategy in many game theory situations. There are some evidence that pe
4010.
by runarberg 7y ago
Indeed buses or by no means the optimal technology of transporting people. But they often are the cheapest and easiest, and therefor often the smartest choice for urban planners. However once buses start to become congested (Seattle, I’m lo
4011.
by runarberg 7y ago
Note that I'm giving my self all of the advantages of all of the alternatives. And I’m also painting this scenario in a world where all of these alternatives have all of the required infrastructure in place[1]. With that said, yes
4012.
by runarberg 7y ago
If there is political will to fund the research needed and create the infrastructure for autonomous highway driving lanes, surely politicians in the US can find the incentives to fund the infrastructure needed for extra buses (including lux
4013.
by runarberg 7y ago
Whoa. Misunderstanding here. I’m not talking about eliminating transportation. That is just stupid. Alternative transportation from driving include: busses, trains, bikes, walking, trolleys, bicycles, ski-lifts, airplaines, taxis, boats, ro
4014.
by runarberg 7y ago
It seems there is a solution for your problem already: Busses. Although not strictly automated, they are externalized. That is you are not the one doing the driving, and therefor you are free to sleep, read, work, etc, while you wait to get
4015.
by runarberg 7y ago
I vote for neither. We don’t need to drive, and we certainly don’t need computers to do it for us. There are other—much more easily automated—systems that are several orders of magnitudes more efficient then driving and—if implemnted suffic
4016.
by runarberg 7y ago
We might both be guilty of over generalizing. Farming practices differ very widely across cultures and time. Farming in post colonial America was often done on big areas of land that was often handed out for free (or very cheap) and the mar
4017.
by runarberg 7y ago
This is not entirely correct. If you are a farmer you (or a someone working with you) still need to travel for numerous reasons, including to bring your products to market, to round up your animals, to buy equipment and supplies, etc. You s
4018.
by runarberg 7y ago
I think even horses was more of an upper class thing. Most humans throughout our modern history have used their own muscle power for work and transportation. In poorer rural communities a bicycle is immensely helpful in getting your product
4019.
by runarberg 7y ago
That is a solved problem. The only reason you can’t bring your bike on the bus/train is because of a policy that prevents your local transit system from investing in the necessary equipment. Why are they enacting this policy I don’t kn
4020.
by runarberg 7y ago
There are buses, trains, etc. That can take you most of the way. It is super handy to be able to bike to a well served direct bus route, take the bike on the bus, and bike to the destination without having to have to change from/to an

More ›