HN user
at this point you are just embarrassing yourself with your weird crusade attack "psychologists and supporters". I'm sure most readers in this forum feel intuitively that mental ability can be measured with some accuracy, so I doubt you will convince many people. and anyone who cares to look will find a vast psychometric literature that supports the validity of IQ.
are you some sort of indian nationalist?
the point is that they predict future performance equally for different groups, not just that they predict performance. your language is alarmingly exaggerated and pompous for someone who lacks basic reading comprehension skills and is entirely ignorant about the subject of intelligence testing.
the opinions of ignorant journalists are not really relevant. it was strongly criticized by experts in the relevant area. do you realize how intellectually lazy you look when you form strong opinions on subjects without even doing basic research first?
from your link: "The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that in the United States IQ tests as predictors of social achievement are not biased against African Americans since they predict future performance, such as school achievement, similarly to the way they predict future performance for Caucasians."
so the consensus in psychometrics is that iq tests are not systematically biased against particular groups.
and of course it measures a lot more than a person's ability to take intelligence tests". just look at the "social outcomes" section of the wikipedia page...
"the mismeasure of man" is a garbage book by the noted fraud and liar steven jay gould. it certainly should not be used as any sort of reference on intelligence testing.
This whole post is a perfect example of the danger of Taleb's work. Someone with no knowledge of finance or statistics has read his books and now feels able to make extremely strong statements about a link between financial theory and financial crises. :(
no, it's just bad writing. meandering nonsense is never good writing, though perhaps it boosts your ego to feel like you are part of a special club (of millions) that understands his ramblings.
this happens all the time in the UK. big accounting firms and F100 companies recruit people in unrelated degrees all the time.
mostly luck
he's really lost the plot. :(
but of course any intelligent person can do those jobs without a "business" degree.
Entry into higher education is more competitive in most European countries...
it is British -- not Scottish -- oil.
could you explain a bit more about the mechanics of buying/selling retail flow? or is there any standard reference for learning more about the details?
how does interactivebrokers compare to this in terms of cost? are there any hidden costs retail investors should be aware of?
are you ok with the vast amount of money and time currently wasted on higher education? do you think the four year degree is really the most appropriate form of training in most cases?
there are a lot of investment funds out there. even if none possess any skill, it is possible for a few to produce extreme risk-adjusted performance simply by chance.
Where is the paper for this novel clustering algorithm?
but you are not thinking hard, you are running silly worthless simulations and puffing up your own ego.
What a bizarre article. this is a worthless exercise without any data.
the task of building a model of labour market and estimating your model with real data is very complicated.
you should actually make an effort to learn and understand modern economics before coming to such strong conclusions. there are good reasons why the discipline exists in its current form.
it is clear from the "slide-ruler-y math" jibe that you have no idea about the technical ability required to do research, especially in theoretical microeconomics and econometrics. you'll need more than mastery of "Mathematics for Engineering" and MATLAB to disrupt the economics profession.
bigotry? i don't think you understand what that word means.
without British rule India would be an even bigger shit hole.
i think the "trend" is towards advising people against studying humanities unless they have a very strong motivation to study these subjects and are fully aware of the opportunity cost. when people give such advice it does mean that they "hate" the humanities.
...but none of that makes much difference:
"Does test preparation help improve student performance on the SAT and ACT? For students that have taken the test before and would like to boost their scores, coaching seems to help, but by a rather small amount. After controlling for group differences, the average coaching boost on the math section of the SAT is 14 to 15 points. The boost is smaller on the verbal section of the test, just 6 to 8 points. The combined effect of coaching on the SAT for the NELS sample is about 20 points."
http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/Briggs_Theeffectofadmissionst...
why would you be looking primarily at physicists if you are trying to find data scientists??
"I believe educational policy should be made under the assumption that everyone is a highly intelligent, curious and creative individual like myself" -- Stanley Kubrick
"One SIMPLE TRICK to radically change educational outcomes!!"
it's amazing that people still actively publicize idiotic self promoters and charlatans like Mitra.
there is a huge difference between having a sense of curiosity about the world and studying science seriously. people love to watch documentaries about the natural world, yet very few attempt to teach themselves mathematics or physics.