

people aren’t downvoting you emotionally. they just very much disagree with the notion of an individual owning intellectual property, and the idea that copyright somehow spurs innovation instead of snuffing it.
people aren’t downvoting you emotionally. they just very much disagree with the notion of an individual owning intellectual property, and the idea that copyright somehow spurs innovation instead of snuffing it.
at the time, they honestly did.
you guys are fucking crazy. ukrainian government knows there’s a very tangible and real possibility of defeat, or at the least concessions to russia during negotiations. do you really think it is in their best interests to let the kremlin make claims about ukrainian acts of terror during that stage?? like it or not, the world isnt some fucking equitable, fair fairy tale. russia has significantly more bargaining power here. they can afford ukraine making such claims, that doesn’t matter. on the flip side, ukraine cannot.
not to double reply to you but the issue here isn’t training versus not training for the test; the issue is that psychiatrist and psychologist can’t rotely sort out what influences “training” and other activities actually had on the results of the test versus what a theoretical, “pure” test result would’ve been. frankly i’d imagine different psychologist in different context would want to control for this in a variety of ways. maybe in one experiment, telling the population not to train is the best way to get at the data you want. but for the most part? no. absolutely not. the claim that telling people to not train or study for an IQ test somehow is a be all end all control for wanton influences & noise in IQ results is total bunk. think about this. what even qualifies as studying for an IQ test? is the teenage boy incidentally studying for his ACT’s at the same time as a population IQ test, who consequently scored higher than the median average for his age range, cheating or invalid in his results? most people and psychology studies would likely say no, not really. this demonstrates some of the fundamental flaws in IQ and g-factor that psychologists have to recognize while working with them. there’s truly no real way to sort out what is “cheating/invalidating” on an IQ test versus what data is potentially legitimate. because objectively speaking, what IQ measures is incredibly subjective. on top of all that, either way, it’s impossible and impractical to try and control for every single thing people do in their daily lives.
EDIT: stray “a” removed
the video annoys you because you’re not the target audience. you clearly already see validity in IQ as a metric and have use cases for it. most STEM people (veritasium’s audience writ large) do not traditionally view IQ favorably, and at worst consider it a worthless bunk metric. the video isn’t intended to say “hey! here’s how psychiatrist and psychologist view and use IQ in statistical analysis and their work (bc remember, STEM people know about this legitimate use in these fields, they just typically discount or look down upon it due to IQ’s reputation),” it’s intended to say “hey! i know you don’t think IQ is real/valid, but here is a video essay exploring the concept through a very STEM lense.” of course he talks about taking the test and studying for it. he talks about taking the test blind too. he’s a fucking engineer, physicist, and doctor. the exact kind of person to recognize what tools like IQ metrics actually are, and that there is no single one way to measure, use, or quantify this data that’s more “correct” than others, when divorced from context. veritasium demonstrated a very thorough understanding of the actual concepts and theoretical principles that underlie IQ, and I thought his video was a very fresh perspective. it certainly demonstrated a mastery of the concept that i believe is absent from someone who might hold the opinions you’re espousing here (genuinely don’t mean to come off as rude here sorry for having autism energy)
they don’t follow emeralds bc that’s an easily misconstrued caricature and mojang doesn’t want to deal with the possible (& somewhat justified) shit they’d get for it. seriously. big noses? an aptitude for trading and banking? speaking an incomprehensible language? it’s already a little “questionable” how the villagers are portrayed now, making them straight up follow emeralds to the point of their own potential deaths would 101% push it over the edge for a lot of people. i’m not trying to say mojang is necessarily designing the villagers to be antisemitic, in fact i think it’s quite the opposite and mojang is actively, and might i say diligently, working against what bigotry and antisemitism did make it’s way into minecraft’s game design in the early days. but still. i would appreciate if villagers didn’t also follow emeralds to the point of them plummeting to their doom, the neonazis in minecraft are already too many, and unwelcome, and shit like this is just going to embolden their communities