IQ GENERAL: POSTMORTEM

File: 62 KB, 1098x248, Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 7.18.06 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

IQ GENERAL: POSTMORTEM Anonymous Mon Jul 17 19:23:26 2017 No.9044261 [Reply] [Original]

>>9039124

This previous thread proved that this is a legit online IQ test.

>What did we learn about the psychtests.com IQ test?

1. The IQ test has a strong correlation with proctored IQ tests like WAIS-R and Stanford-Binet.

2. Raw IQ scores (SD 18.67) are converted to a standardized IQ score (SD 15) and then reported to users. This means that your reported score matches what you’d get on an SD 15 test like the WAIS-R (4.4 in Compliance with APA Standards PDF).

3. Because the test’s samples were gathered online, sampling bias was tightly controlled for (7.10 in Compliance with APA Standards PDF).

>What did we learn from anons in the previous thread that took the test?

1. A majority of anons reported receiving scores comparable to scores they had received on proctored IQ tests.

2. The corollary to the Dunning-Kruger Effect was once again confirmed as many test takers who scored highly on the test did not accept their scores and argued that they were artificially inflated, falsely presuming that what they found easy was also easy for those of lesser abilities.

>What does this mean for IQ testing?

1. While people interested in determining their IQ should always take a battery of IQ tests and compare their results across all tests to calculate a composite score, an online IQ test can be just as valid as one administered by a licensed psychologist so long as it is properly developed and standardized.

2. The “there are no valid online IQ tests” meme is just that- a meme.

>THE TEST
https://testyourself.psychtests.com/staticid/975

>COMPLIANCE WITH APA STANDARDS
http://corporate.psychtests.com/pdf/APA_Standards_Plumeus.pdf

>SUMMARY STATISTICS
https://testyourself.psychtests.com/tests/showpdf.php?name=classical_iq_lite/psychtests/classical_iq_lite.pdf

Number of Subjects: 15,884
Overall Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.91 (57 items)
Mean = 109.59
Standard Deviation = 18.67

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 19:24:34 2017 No.9044264 blacks have a lower IQ.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 19:28:01 2017 No.9044274 >>9044264 Yep

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 19:34:57 2017 No.9044293
File: 1.93 MB, 460x259, think.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9044261
>2. The corollary to the Dunning-Kruger Effect was once again confirmed as many test takers who scored highly on the test did not accept their scores and argued that they were artificially inflated, falsely presuming that what they found easy was also easy for those of lesser abilities.
How is smart people thinking they're dumb a corollary of dumb people thinking they're smart?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 19:54:02 2017 No.9044346 >>9044293 It's all just a matter of understanding the word "corollary". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:03:31 2017 No.9044372

I was one of the posters from the original thread who got a 147 score for crystallized intelligence. Since I think I got every question right, am I to conclude that 147 is the score ceiling for both the crystalized component and fluid component, and 155 is the ceiling for a composite score (namely, if you get 147 on both, your composite is 155)? I didn't purchase my score report, so I'm curious how the final score is broken down.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:12:11 2017 No.9044405 I got 120. Not bad, but it could be higher. This is eerily close to my Woodcock-Johnson 122. I wish there were a safe way to boost IQ.

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:13:35 2017 No.9044408
File: 491 KB, 952x1096, Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 8.10.32 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9044372

I believe the score ceiling is 155 as indicated. At least two anons in the previous thread claimed 155s.

I got a 147 as well and the detailed report indicated 147 for both crystallized and fluid intelligence, so I suspect the composite is calculated like an average, but I'm not entirely sure though.

Even I got 63/100 for the matrices subtest and in the 80s and 90s for a couple other subtests, so you didn't get everything right.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:16:33 2017 No.9044416 File: 66 KB, 960x949, IMG_0395.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Oh so my post morbid iq is 114

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:25:20 2017 No.9044439 >>9044416 That's 3 SD in some parts of the world.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:29:01 2017 No.9044446 >>9044439 Not to be a downer but it's an incurable autoimmune disease

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:41:14 2017 No.9044472 File: 140 KB, 877x1096, 15895747_10155057657233115_6207507532817327745_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044446 Shiiiiieeet sorry mane :( Here's a sexy lady on me.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:43:19 2017 No.9044477 >>9044264 I scored a 146 though.

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:47:06 2017 No.9044490

>>9044408
Very interesting. Now I wonder if wrong answers are weighted differently of if there's some subtest overlap, since 97 seems like a pretty granular score for the verbal portion (which only had seven questions as I recall). Anyway, that pic is helpful.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:47:46 2017 No.9044491 I got 144 but i'm not a native speaker so i used google translate for word problems. There were at least 2 words i did not understand. What should've been my iq?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:55:15 2017 No.9044508 I got 94. I want to beat the shit out of the person who posted this. You ruined my evening, you fucking retarded chode.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 20:58:43 2017 No.9044522 Well shit. I scored a bit lower on this one than on the Woodcock-Johnson. I'm curious how the test was designed and normed, because that was not what I was expecting.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:03:57 2017 No.9044530 >>9044491 144 is your score (SD 15). The test converts your raw score (SD 18.67) over to SD 15. It may very well be higher if English isn't your first language.

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:06:11 2017 No.9044537
File: 145 KB, 800x1142, 800px-Stephen_Wolfram_PR.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9044264
And whites have an even lower IQ than Ashkenazi Jews. This is a reminder that we need to get rid of all these white "people" to make way for the true high IQ Jewish master race.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:11:19 2017 No.9044548 File: 12 KB, 200x200, clifford-johnson.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044537 Nah just anyone below a certain threshold

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:11:42 2017 No.9044551 >>9044522 >Woodcock-Johnson Three penis references in one test name. Very impressive.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:13:36 2017 No.9044558 >>9044530 No, i mean i used google translate as a dictionary for a couple of word problems, which is not permitted.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:24:24 2017 No.9044583 >>9044558 That would skew your score if the questions you used it for were testing your understanding of specific definitions. It wouldn't make a difference for any other type of world problem though.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:29:25 2017 No.9044599 File: 54 KB, 280x396, Richard_Feynman_Nobel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044548 Nice try whitey, but I'm afraid you don't meet the requirement.

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 21:31:22 2017 No.9044604

>>9044261

Because the thread died I didn't get the chance to answer to >>9044360 :

Here's my reply :

But they are still correlated, or so have many studies shown ; but it's less about achievements, than just my academic achievements. I nearly failed things like high school mathematics, I am deeply anxious, to the point of paranoia, and I can't seem to represent things in my head very well (I have no sense of orientation or ability for spatial reasoning). Certainly, you could say that my lack of spatial reasoning is the reason why I failed mathematics, but seeing as it's high school mathematics, you should still be able to do it with the support of a pen and paper. In my mind, seeing as IQ correlates (along with other factors, true, but it still strongly correlates) with academic success, and that I've had many troubles there, I simply don't believe I have an IQ of around 147. Not even 130. Maybe 120 if you're generous, but not that high.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 22:32:59 2017 No.9044749 I have Asperger's but I'm too insecure to take an IQ test because I might be disappointed, what score should I expect?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 22:34:07 2017 No.9044751 >>9044749 >what score should I expect? >I have Asperger's but I'm too insecure 99

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 22:38:51 2017 No.9044754 >>9044751 Well some guy on here constantly comments on the superiority of autism when it comes to IQ so I'm interested

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 22:40:03 2017 No.9044759

>>9044604

I dunno what to say. If you're deeply anxious or experiencing psychological stress that can affect your ability to do well academically. Smart kids from bad homes generally don't do as well as they should academically compared to kids from good homes with similar IQs.

Maybe take a proctored IQ test for a point of comparison.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 22:41:06 2017 No.9044761 >>9044749 >>9044754 If you have Aspergers and not full blown autism you'll probably do pretty well.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 23:27:20 2017 No.9044858 File: 430 KB, 1831x1685, Firefox_Screenshot_2017-07-18T03-05-37.990Z.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Why is the free version showing me my crystallized intelligence score instead of my overall score?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 23:28:48 2017 No.9044860 This test is bullshit, it doesn't go above 200, which I was actually tested at in person...

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 23:35:43 2017 No.9044879

>>9044759

Well, I'm not from a bad home, I just don't think the score indicated on the test works out with my real life performances, and I'm not going to pay for a clinical IQ test, not only cause I can't pay for it, but also because it doesn't really matter? I'd ideally just like to be able to understand mathematics and get a STEM degree, but I'm not sure I can.

Anonymous Mon Jul 17 23:41:46 2017 No.9044895

>>9044879
That there is some correlation between intelligence and success in life doesn't mean that everyone with high IQ is guaranteed a successful life and is destined to be rich, famous, respected and loved. Academic performance to a good degree is about motivation, discipline and compliance with authority, none of which have anything to do with intelligence. IQ isn't some magical measure of your worth as a human being.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 17 23:56:39 2017 No.9044925 It seems fishy to have arithmetic and language based problems in an IQ test.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:10:49 2017 No.9044948

>>9044261
In the last IQ General, it was proven that we don't need WAIS, Stanford-binet, Ravens etc. anymore. They've been made obsolete by Queensdom, and Psychtests AIM.

We have definitively shown that it doesn't take a proctored subtest with 15-20 subtly different questions to judge (say) spatial reasoning. We can do it just as accurately with just 2 multiple choice questions and get the same results.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:11:48 2017 No.9044949 File: 108 KB, 640x640, nomizi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044948 >In the last IQ General, it was proven that we don't need WAIS, Stanford-binet, Ravens etc. anymore.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:31:44 2017 No.9044992 File: 126 KB, 669x960, Cv5MNteUMAA0Iie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044948

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:39:19 2017 No.9045011

>>9044895

I understand this. I understand that it doesn't guarantee success or prevent failures. I understand that it's not because IQ correlate with things that it excludes other causes also correlating with the same things. However, seeing as I failed things into which only intelligence factors in or plays a role, like mathematics, I doubt I have an IQ above 120. You don't have to know history, or have a wide vocabulary to understand mathematics, you just need to understand, and I can't really do that. Besides, don't you think it weird that I can't locate myself or follow a map, or represent and play with geometrical figures in my head in real life (lack of spatial reasoning), but that I would do well on a test which (kinda, not thoroughly, I'll grant you that, but a little still) is supposed to test spatial reasoning? If I could not have used a piece of paper to rewrite the mathematical problems algebraically I would not have been able to do them, at all.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:40:24 2017 No.9045012 >>9044948 >psychtest.com = 30-60 minutes >WAIS-R = 45-75 minutes >Stanford-Binet = 45-90 minutes Quit being such a diva just because you got btfo in the last thread.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 00:46:12 2017 No.9045022

>>9044759

>If you're deeply anxious or experiencing psychological stress that can affect your ability to do well academically.

I misread what you said there. Is there a way to prove or test this? I don't trust my subjective opinions, I'd like something more solid on this, but I'm not sure if I could ''test'' it myself.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:04:55 2017 No.9045040

>>9045022

https://www.nmu.edu/education/sites/DrupalEducation/files/UserFiles/Dobson_Cassie_MP.pdf

This study seems to indicate that high levels of anxiety have a negative effect on academic performance but low levels actually have a slightly positive effect.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623090713.htm

This article suggests that moderate anxiety doesn't hurt your performance so much as it increases the amount of effort you have to put in to match the performance of those who aren't experiencing anxiety.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:26:01 2017 No.9045061

I got a 147. No idea which one(s) I messed up, probably one of the verbal ones. Other IQ tests I did online like various forms of Raven's matrices etc. tend to give put me around 145-150, and my GRE scores were I think 167/170, so that seems about right. It's too low for physics anyway.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:31:59 2017 No.9045076 >>9045061 That's not too low for physics. Physics graduate have on average something like 140. You're fine for physics, anon. Also do you have links for the other sites you tested, for comparison's sake with this one?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:35:43 2017 No.9045083 >>9045012 >psychtest.com = 30-60 minutes Isn't 30 min the limit?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:41:35 2017 No.9045093

my dude, i have always scored above 120 in tests posted in 4chins, but this is the first time i get a 97. lost like 10 minutes during the test because of a connection issue with the server, but it did not "finish" the test, probably because the time limit havent been hit yet.
seriously contemplating suicide tbqh.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:44:22 2017 No.9045095

>>9045076
I did the iqtest.dk one, the mensa.no one, and probably some other one I can't remember. Also the average is brought down by experimentalists and unless you're someone with 160+ who is going to a top 5-10 for theoretical physics there is no hope for you.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 01:50:07 2017 No.9045104 >>9044508 >IQ of 94 >Calls others retarded Top jej

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:14:50 2017 No.9045135

>>9045095

Why do you say there's no hope for you? To discover something? To create a new theory? I'd say 140+ is enough. Certainly, it'd be better to have more, but you can still manage with work to do something and contribute, even if you're not Einstein. And remember fame and accomplishments =/= level of your intellect. Einstein didn't work alone, and didn't magically, out of nowhere pop a new theory. I wouldn't give up. Besides, you might be like Feynmann? Have relatively low verbal skills, but very high numerical skills. That's possible too.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:25:03 2017 No.9045144 >>9044261 >iq please leave this board

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:34:02 2017 No.9045153 >>9044261 134 Started zoning out on the last few logic problems. Pretty consistent with the 131 I tested at back in 3rd grade.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:38:35 2017 No.9045159 File: 54 KB, 423x1136, IMG_0785.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044261 >open test >see this >spend 5 minutes trying to decipher it >close tab Such is the life of a brainlet

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:39:24 2017 No.9045160 >>9045095 Eh. Got 141 on the mensa one. There's one of two problems near the end that tripped me up I think. And the .dk one asks me to download a file which doesn't seem legit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:40:20 2017 No.9045162 >>9045159 O shit I see its the alphabet sideways now, gonna kms

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:45:01 2017 No.9045165 >>9045162 Yeah, some of them aren't so much reasoning skills than they are "can you figure out our silly little trick" skills. I'd also bet the time of day and how often you have to think outside the box have a lot to do with your score.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:45:56 2017 No.9045166 >>9045165 To be fair, only the first 2 questions are like that, and the milkshake one.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:48:08 2017 No.9045170 is there an accurate IQ test that will only take me 5 minutes and only have 20 questions?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 02:53:31 2017 No.9045177

>>9045166
Don't forget the hardest part, you're allowed to use a calculator, a piece of paper, and a pencil. I didn't read the instructions thoroughly.

Probably would have helped to list names down for the logic problems. I did realize that I could use a calculator once I saw a problem where 12.08 and 12.12 were both answers.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 03:20:22 2017 No.9045195 File: 7 KB, 250x194, 1487684550695s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >110

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 03:21:35 2017 No.9045197 >>9045195 It's okay, anon. There's enough room in the brainlet gas chambers. You don't have to struggle to figure out how to tie a noose.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 03:38:46 2017 No.9045210 >>9045159 I actually finished it, and got 131 but it took me like 45 minues It's also 3:30AM here and I only did it because I cant sleep

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:06:24 2017 No.9045247 >>9044261 >No independent verification >Trying to sell you something All the proof I need that it's bullshit desu.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:10:01 2017 No.9045254
File: 82 KB, 635x620, blarg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Did it in ~25 mins at 26hrs no sleep. Had to check what a vise was as I've only ever spelled it vice (UK).

Test seems too easy comp to other IQ tests I've done before though I haven't done a real one since I was a kid (145-165?160? dont remember).

Also to mr 147 physics I just came out with a 2:1 physics having done literally 0 revision years 1-3 and 2 days before each exam in year 4. Physics ain't that much more difficult than other subjects if at all.

Oh and IQ tests are bullshit

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:14:48 2017 No.9045260 File: 18 KB, 499x245, crystal whore never.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9044261 well, I guess this explains why I do nothing but smoke and drink coffee. Going to college wasn't even an option >>9044551 severely underrated

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:15:53 2017 No.9045261 >>9045254 What's a 2:1 physics?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:17:19 2017 No.9045262 >>9045177 fuck! really? I guess 131 wasn't so bad for head calculation

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:25:37 2017 No.9045270 >>9045177 >mfw didn't read that i deserved to get those questions wrong lol >>9045195 114 brainlet reporting in. it's ok, 1SD brother. we attack at midnight

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:27:24 2017 No.9045274 >>9045270 >it's ok, 1SD brother. we attack at midnight assuming you can work the doorknob to leave your house

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:34:28 2017 No.9045287 >>9045274 >assuming you can work the doorknob to leave your house the short bus operator will handle that for us

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:36:42 2017 No.9045289

>>9045261
Degree classifications in the UK
1st >=70% avg
2:1 60%
2:2 50%
3rd 40%
Fail

Here basically a 1st is seen as v good, 2:1 is good 2:2 is 'ehhh' 3rd is a waste of time.

Technical jobs req a 2:1 generally ( sometimes a 2:2) Professional e.g. finance is generally 2:1

post-grad is either 1st or 2:1 depending on the institution and subject

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:42:08 2017 No.9045294

>>9044261
Did people never pay attention to how the score was just crystallized IQ? Not the same thing as g. Just because you read more books and studied for your SATs doesn't mean you're going to have a more flexible mind or as fluid general intelligence as somebody who wasn't as privileged. I would know, I got 144 and I'm stupid as fuck.

Also, obsession with high IQ is just the intelligent failure's last source of pride. The only thing more pathetic than a stupid failure is a smart one.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 04:55:45 2017 No.9045306 File: 532 KB, 618x894, toodumb.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >104 might as well sign up for the army

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 05:06:35 2017 No.9045318 >>9045294 It also tests fluid intelligence but you have to pay for the report. Interestingly enough, my fluid intelligence tested higher than crystallized intelligence, despite my belief that my memory was my best asset.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 05:08:47 2017 No.9045320 >>9045159 I feel like this is one of those "WHEN YOU SEE IT...YOU'LL SHIT BRICKS" moments

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 05:19:30 2017 No.9045329 >>9045289 >you need to score bellow 40% to fail a course Why is the British university system rated so highly again? Fucking corruption in action. How the fuck are you allowed to pass with such a low grade?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 05:24:27 2017 No.9045331

I wish /sci/ wouldn't constantly pretend this place is full of retards when clearly the average IQ around here is pretty high (maybe as high as 125; it's hard to tell). I mean, you have one guy who is depressed because he "only" got 131, and another who thinks the average physics PhD is 160 (it's actually 130). You guys have been on the internet too long. It has skewed your perception of a "normal" versus high IQ, because people lie about their IQs so much. Also doesn't help that you're probably surrounded by smart people in everyday life, so your intuitions about smartness are anchored unrealistically high. 125 is pretty fucking high in real life. You can do a lot with that. (Average Harvard undergrad is 128.) Anything above 135 is going to get diminishing returns outside of academia. Even if you're "only" 115, fucking relax. It's not the end of the world.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 05:26:02 2017 No.9045333 File: 7 KB, 300x205, ash.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9045294 >>9045318 there's g-loaded up the ass test that floats around. I think it's that mensa one for Danes

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 06:04:28 2017 No.9045364

My result with this testyourself.psychtests.com was 131. Other online tests usually have me 130-135 iirc. I was evaluated at age 11 (am now 20) to be 124 - no clue which test, though.

>>9045254
This test felt easier than the Mensa workout (not the actual placement test, but the example test) where I was able to solve ~70% of the questions.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 06:36:57 2017 No.9045389 >>9045329 this happens in the states as well. not uk so might be different, but a lot of first/second year is designed so 50/100 is the average grade

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 06:43:22 2017 No.9045394 File: 19 KB, 507x253, iqtest.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >tfw consigned to eternal sub-150 IQ brainletdom because of that milkshake question

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 07:18:59 2017 No.9045437 >>9045083 From the front page of the test: "This test is supposed to assess your intellectual potential, not your performance under stress. Therefore, there is no time limit. Nonetheless, this test is usually completed in less than one hour."

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 07:55:17 2017 No.9045472 >>9044261 Alright, so this is a legit IQ test? Great, how should I prep? Should I eat something first? I haven't slept yet, but nothing that mug of coffee can't fix.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:19:10 2017 No.9045491 File: 17 KB, 598x306, 85f974bf706bdb8e07cec78eaba29a30.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I would say pretty accurate ngl, I have scored 134 on the UK MENSA IQ test a few years ago. However I have been fucked on drugs and shit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:28:20 2017 No.9045504 >>9045076 wheres your source for average physics graduates IQ? I have done a psy bach and I really want to do physics, I have aprox 130

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:28:30 2017 No.9045506 Fucking milkshakes man. Why are they putting in sets with ambiguous classification criteria? You can drink milk straight from the cow's tiddies. Every other drink on that list is processed artificially in one way or another.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:38:59 2017 No.9045520 I said that irreverent is blasphemous, but contemptuous also seems compatible. English is not my first language, what is the most correct usage?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:40:49 2017 No.9045523 >>9045506 You can drink juice straight from the fruit with that logic. It will be pulpy, but who cares? It's not like you aren't drinking pasteurized milk.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:43:32 2017 No.9045524 >>9045394 What did you pick?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:48:49 2017 No.9045526 >>9045523 >You can drink juice straight from the fruit with that logic No you can't. You eat fruit. Only true of stuff like coconut milk. But coconut milk and the like wasn't on that list.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:53:27 2017 No.9045531 >>9045526 Dude idk what kind of fruit you're eating but these oranges are J U I C Y. A coconut is technically classified as a fruit, and coconut "milk" is actually juice.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:57:22 2017 No.9045535

>>9045531
You can't drink oranges anon. You eat them along with the juice inside the cells. Watermelon has even more water content. You don't drink watermelon either.

By the way, what is the answer to the accountants/managers question. I got bored and just clicked I don't know.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 08:59:30 2017 No.9045537 Is it safe to buy the results? Did anyone try? Did you get scammed?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:14:33 2017 No.9045553

>>9045524
I owned up and told them I didn't know
No point guessing on a test like this, since you're only cheating yourself, and if the question is badly designed like others have said then a lot of "I don't know" answers would tip off the test designer

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:18:10 2017 No.9045560 >>9045535 >I got bored and just clicked I don't know. One of the employees doesn't work on Fridays, the other only works in the accounting department from Mon to Thurs IIRC. It's pretty simple, it's just written to look more complicated than it is.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:23:02 2017 No.9045566

>>9045523
> It's not like you aren't drinking pasteurized milk.
I've only started drinking pasteurised milk after I moved away from home. My parents used to work on a cow ranch. Now they have a deal with a rancher from a village close to them that sells them unprocessed milk. We would drink the milk raw (none of us in my family likes the taste of cooked milk). I still would if I could get it from somewhere close for cheap.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:24:47 2017 No.9045568

>>9045535
>)
You can't drink oranges anon. You eat them along with the juice inside the cells. Watermelon has even more water content. You don't drink watermelon either.
No but I can drink the juice from an orange. Never tried to suck oranges from a slice of orange until nothing is left but pulp and peel?

The answer was Cathy, who was the only person who is likely to be free on that day without having worked a bunch of days already. Neil can't work for most of the week including Friday, Cathy doesn't work at the beginning of the week, so the last dude (John IIRC) spends his days in the beginning covering for them both.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:27:34 2017 No.9045571 >>9045568 What if Neil takes his extended weekend after Sunday (so he goes to work on Thursday and Friday but not on MOnday and Tuesday)?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:28:18 2017 No.9045572 >>9044261 >The “there are no valid online IQ tests” meme is just that- a meme. Except it's still a meme since these tests can't be used for diagnostic purposes, which is the whole point of an IQ test you mong.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:32:22 2017 No.9045575 >>9045572 That's a legal technicality.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:35:16 2017 No.9045579 File: 31 KB, 456x320, 1427420146273.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >101 hahaha fucking kill me I'll never be an engineer

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:39:13 2017 No.9045584 >>9045571 Then you would have an unorthodox "extended weekend" going right into the middle of the week.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:57:02 2017 No.9045601 I got 120. I got 134 on an actual test I did a few years back. Maybe its depression, Im told its a factor.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 09:58:22 2017 No.9045604 >>9045568 I put not enough evidence for the cathy one, it wasnt clear if a 4 day week was mon to thurs or tues to fri

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:18:23 2017 No.9045632 >>9045575 How is that a technicality? What do you think IQ tests were designed for? Dickwaving?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:20:43 2017 No.9045638

>>9045604
From the information given, you're guaranteed that Cathy will be free on Friday regardless of the situation because she's not available Tuesday and Wednesday, days where John picks up the slack (including Monday too if I remember correctly). It may be the case that Neil could also be available, but that's only if he takes an unorthodox long weekend which is unlikely.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:24:53 2017 No.9045651 >get 148 when tested by a professional for a whole day as a kid (8-10 years old, don't remember) >get 117 right now Does IQ decrease with age?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:26:52 2017 No.9045654 >>9045651 IQ tests are less reliable when you're young because you're still in development so the results are more volatile. You could have been one of the kids who matured faster, hence your higher score compared to your peers back then.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:28:04 2017 No.9045657 >>9045654 >started off in the 1%, ended up being barely above average Should I even go on?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:34:36 2017 No.9045668 >>9045572 And what's the standard for qualifying for diagnostic validity?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:35:28 2017 No.9045670 File: 40 KB, 601x601, photo (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Heh, everyone here thinks if they score high on some bum fuck IQ test online it means they are destined for greatness. Good luck ending up like your fuck boy super hero, Chris.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:36:42 2017 No.9045675

>>9045638
You get overlapping times in the othe days though. Is this an admissible solution? One of the conditions is that only one employee can work for a manager during any given day. With that arrangement Cathy only works 2 days, so she's essentially free monday as well. This problem is intractable. Someone has to work less days regardless of the arrangement.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:38:20 2017 No.9045678 >>9045657 IQ117 puts you higher than almost 90% of the population dude. You're not "barely" above average.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:39:23 2017 No.9045680 >>9045670 Retarded 2huposter, kill yourself already!

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:41:18 2017 No.9045682 >>9045678 >90% So, a STEM PhD isn't out of reach? I still feel extremely mediocre. I've never been an overachiever, either.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:44:25 2017 No.9045692 >>9045682 Just believe in yourself and you can achieve anything anon-kun :)

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:46:31 2017 No.9045697

>>9045682
>So, a STEM PhD isn't out of reach?
It most likely is out of your reach, but if you can find a suitable niche you might be able to get one anyway. My sole point was to explain that the swing in measurements is not unexpected. You still have a higher IQ than 9 people out of 10. You just grew up faster and reached your plateau sooner than the other kids.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:54:57 2017 No.9045711 >>9045675 Why can't Cathy work on Monday? Also, how is that a problem given the constraints of the problem?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 10:55:53 2017 No.9045714 >>9045697 >You still have a higher IQ than 9 people out of 10 That's hardly something to be proud of.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:03:36 2017 No.9045723

>>9045682
Well, from what I believe really high IQ can help you solve some really challenging problems. I think that for becoming a great researcher(and getting PhD) you need to see things that other people don't see, it's not really related to your IQ. Not many IMO winners become great mathematicians.
One of the greathest mathematicians of 20th century A. Grothendieck wrote that people consider him great not because he can solve problems left by other mathematicians, but an ability to see what other people cannot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:26:36 2017 No.9045744 File: 10 KB, 499x250, brainlet.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9045394 i know those feels brother

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:44:15 2017 No.9045763 >>9044261 So now we just need to know what the cut off should be for genocide of low IQ brainlets.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:51:35 2017 No.9045770

>>9045714
>hardly something to be proud of
Honestly, going into stem will be tough for you. The average engineering major has something like a 125 IQ, and the people who get PhD's in the field probably another 5-10 points on top of that, putting them in the 1%.

Just suck it up and get a PhD in education or something meme-tier, you'll still be smarter than your colleagues.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:54:16 2017 No.9045777 >>9044261 I didn't know I was allowed to use a calculator, a pencil and a papper, got 107. Should I retake or just accept that I'm a brainlet?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:55:38 2017 No.9045779 >>9044261 127 put "i don't know" for many problems at the end because fuck those wordy problems.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:55:48 2017 No.9045780
File: 22 KB, 401x395, 1392489312909.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>country with IQ average ~89
>Overall score: 126
It's not bad is it?
Considering I am a hikkiNEET who spends his entire day wasting brainpower on the internet and junk food, and haven't touched a single book for ~8 years.
How much better would I have done if I wasn't a slob?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:58:11 2017 No.9045783 >>9045777 i used a pen and paper for some of the math stuff. 127 seems far too high though, and i'm not fishing for "dunning-kruger" type complements. why don't you tell us the un-adjusted score, OP? i'd like to know.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 11:58:43 2017 No.9045788

>>9045770
>PhD in education or something meme-tier
No, that's fucking depressing. I'd rather be a shitter at STEM than really good at something irrelevant.
I'm like >>9045777, I did everything in my head, so I'll cling to the belief that my score could've been higher.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:09:37 2017 No.9045808 actually, we could just subtract the mean to get a rough idea of what our real scores are. 117 seems more reasonable.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:19:07 2017 No.9045823

>>9045668
Being reviewed by an expert, being observed by an expert during testing, separate subtests for different indices, correlation between test deficits and educational difficulties, correlation with academic assessments. Rather than giving you a number for you to interpret however you want.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:21:56 2017 No.9045828 File: 36 KB, 655x527, 1488793957315.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] 117 I'll stop posting here now

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:21:58 2017 No.9045829 >>9045394 it was juice, i think. two were alcoholic, and the other two were dairy-based. juice was the one that didn't belong.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:23:50 2017 No.9045831 >>9045829 that's what I picked

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:25:42 2017 No.9045833 >>9045831 what was the question again? was it just a "choose the one that doesn't belong"?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:27:20 2017 No.9045838 >>9044261 and did anyone else get tripped up by that phone-looking pattern? what was I supposed to do with that?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:27:56 2017 No.9045839 Are there any studies on correlation between "smart" appearance and actual iq score? Do people that give the impression of being smart actually have high iq?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:28:21 2017 No.9045841 >>9045833 yep, and it was like, Milk, Milkshake, Beer, Whiskey, Juice. Or something very similar.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:37:57 2017 No.9045862 I want to retake it but I remember the questions so it won't be accurate. What do?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:38:20 2017 No.9045864 >>9045841 I picked milkshake because of the relative viscosity, got a 131

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:40:22 2017 No.9045871 File: 123 KB, 700x482, IMG_0390.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Is this ravens matrices a good test Iq test.dk

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:42:56 2017 No.9045881 File: 14 KB, 500x312, 1497673968533.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9045871 I did well so I'll say yes, probably the best

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:43:02 2017 No.9045882 >>9045864 what I picked juice since it wasn't related to any of the others, got the same score you did.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:43:58 2017 No.9045886 >>9045882 how are beer and whiskey related to milk?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:44:40 2017 No.9045887 >>9045864 ph, viscosity, color, chemical similarity, personal favorite, there are many properties one could have based their decision on. which is why IQ is bullshit

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:46:55 2017 No.9045893 >>9045887 they're looking for an obvious exclusion

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:47:15 2017 No.9045894

>>9045887
>ph, viscosity, color, chemical similarity, personal favorite, there are many properties one could have based their decision on.
>which is why IQ is bullshit
IQ isn't bullshit, it weeds out autists like you who can't figure out the obvious feature they're asking about

it's milkshake

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:49:12 2017 No.9045898 >>9045893 milkshakes are mostly milk, how is it an obvious exclusion?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:49:53 2017 No.9045900 >>9045886 no, they're related to each other, juice wasn't part of a "pairing" like the other 4

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:50:43 2017 No.9045902 >>9045898 because it meets the criteria to pair with at least one other item, as does whiskey for beer, so the answer is likely not based on milk or alcohol

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:52:28 2017 No.9045908 >>9045902 i was arguing in favor of juice, as opposed to >>9045894 >>9045864

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:54:25 2017 No.9045911 they should give /sci/ IDs so we can get our IQ cockwaving sorted out

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:54:57 2017 No.9045914 >>9045908 how is juice like whiskey and beer? I mean, I know a radically obvious way that milkshakes are unlike any of the other three. Milkshake, oddly enough, is the correct answer

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 12:58:35 2017 No.9045919 >>9045914 I phrased this funny. I meant... what qualities do milkshakes have in common with whiskey and beer that would exclude juice?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:00:33 2017 No.9045924 >>9045919 they pair with Milk, and whiskey and beer make a pair. Juice is the odd one out in that case. I think viscosity is right upon further reflection, but how do you not understand the juice viewpoint?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:03:47 2017 No.9045930 >>9045924 because the two pairs share no commonality. Juice would be the odd-man out as it has no counterpart, but I took it to mean "what do all of the remaining have in common that the exclusion will not"

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:08:40 2017 No.9045939 >>9045777 retook, only changed my answers on the math questions, and those last question. got 127. also can someone tell me the answer to q41? I'm having a hard time understanding it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:11:14 2017 No.9045945 >>9045930 That's where you ARE correct, there isn't anything that only excludes milkshakes against viscosity. But the reason it trips up people is that the two pairs are just that, both pairs, linking them 4/5 of the drinks are pairs, and one is not.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:13:41 2017 No.9045951 File: 10 KB, 506x256, bullshit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] iq tests are bullshit, i already have my social science degree so this website bs test can suck my dick

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:14:01 2017 No.9045953 >>9045894 Exactly. They're clearly asking about what beverages I might have for breakfast. I would never have a milkshake for breakfast. >tfw 141 IQ

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:15:03 2017 No.9045955 >>9045951 >iq tests are bullshit, i already have my social science degree so this website bs test can suck my dick >90 IQlets literally browse this board

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:15:03 2017 No.9045956 >>9045951 >I already have my social science degree >90 IQ You don't have to repeat yourself, anon.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:15:33 2017 No.9045958 So if 2 sons and 2 fathers all went to a resturant and they each bought home a doggy bad. Is it possibile there will be 3 doggy bags? I feel like its a trick question

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:15:53 2017 No.9045961 File: 458 KB, 256x256, when the 🤔 kicks in.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9045953 >I would never have a milkshake for breakfast. what a pussy, mommy won't let you?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:16:24 2017 No.9045965 >>9045958 >So if 2 sons and 2 fathers all went to a resturant and they each bought home a doggy bad. Is it possibile there will be 3 doggy bags? yes

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:17:07 2017 No.9045967

>>9045711
If David works Monday to Wednesday for accounting, and THursday and Friday for whatever the other thing was, and Cathy works Accountnig Thursday and Friday, John will work his 3 days Monday to Wednesday for the non-accounting department, which leaves Cathy with nothing to do on Monday, because every manager only uses one employee at a time.

Whatever the configuration, one guy of the three will be left out for one extra day.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:17:12 2017 No.9045968 >>9045965 how? did one doggy bag dissapere as they walked through the door?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:17:52 2017 No.9045971 >>9045945 milkshake stood out for a number of reasons. Temperature upon serving, viscosity, consistency. If it is juice because it's the only lone one, I'll be pissed, but 131 is much, much better than I expected so I'll take it

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:18:56 2017 No.9045973 >>9045968 You're assuming there was 4 people. Grandfather, father, and son = 2 sons and 2 fathers.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:19:46 2017 No.9045975 >>9045973 ah of course. forgive me i only got 117

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:20:48 2017 No.9045977 >>9045971 >serving juice/milk warm

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:21:08 2017 No.9045978 >>9045780 That's the equivalent of an 137 IQ in a country with average IQ 100, in terms of rarity and stuff (z-cores are additive). >How much better would I have done if I wasn't a slob? Not much. IQ is largely genetic.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:21:58 2017 No.9045980

>>9045965
sons don't have to be fathers, but fathers must be sons. There could be a son that is not a father, but he'd by his own existence have to be a son. So if the problem states a hard limit on the number of sons, that is the number of total people, so no

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:22:15 2017 No.9045982 >>9045968 1 pair of son and father are related to eachother second pair is not related so they all have 3 different homes

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:22:15 2017 No.9045983 >>9045838 You were supposed to write telephone in the textbox under it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:22:50 2017 No.9045986 >>9045978 really? everyone in my family is extremely stupid and i got 127. Am i just an exception and my iq came from learning

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:23:18 2017 No.9045987 >>9045839 Yes, and surprisingly, it exists, albeit it's small.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:23:41 2017 No.9045988 File: 31 KB, 213x258, cooldog.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9045980 >sons don't have to be fathers, but fathers must be sons. Why the transphobia?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:24:35 2017 No.9045990 >>9045983 ffs i couldnt remember how to spell it so i just write fone instead, im the guy that got 90 on this bs quiz

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:25:38 2017 No.9045993 >>9045988 >couldn't check "used vhs copy of The Punisher starring Dolph Lundgren" under gender box >test dropped

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:26:17 2017 No.9045995 >>9045980 there could be as few as two people in the question anyway. >son fucks mom, he is both father and son >that son fucks same mom, he is also father and son

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:28:25 2017 No.9046000 >>9045995 yes, but this only happens in the rural parts of the American south, therefore there would be no doggy bag due to obesity epidemic, fucking brainlet

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:28:52 2017 No.9046001 >>9045973 That's not the only possibility. It could also be that one father brought his 2 (or 2 of his) children along while the other father didn't, so the father with two kids return 3 bags home while.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:29:06 2017 No.9046003 >>9045995 couldnt u just say 2 fathers that both happen to have sons? doesnt have to be incest lol

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:29:12 2017 No.9046004 >>9046000 >implying

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:30:50 2017 No.9046008 >>9045973 actually, that'd be three sons

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:32:26 2017 No.9046012

>>9045986
Did they get tested? Your impression of their intelligence might be mistaken.
>>9046000
>his only happens in the rural parts of the American south
It doesn't. Maybe in some shithole 3rd world country. Cousin fucking and the like in the South is a false meme, even in Appalachia.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:35:28 2017 No.9046017

>>9046012
no but i mean they are all religious and more often than not their logic is beyond stupid and gullable. Just for an example my 12 year old brother was going to eat hot dogs and my mum said you need to eat them with some bread so inside your stomach, it will soak up the grease from the hot dogs. saying stupid shit like that just seems to be common in my family

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:36:30 2017 No.9046019 >>9046017 they are gullible i mean, not their logic

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:38:16 2017 No.9046022

>>9046017
>eat them with some bread so inside your stomach, it will soak up the grease from the hot dogs
why do I find myself not totally disagreeing with this. I mean, he'll process the grease regardless, but it might lessen the stomach discomfort from eating greasy food

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:43:47 2017 No.9046031

>>9046022
it was said as an excuse that an impressionable child would believe because im guessing eating hot dogs on their own is 1 step towards having an eating disorder or just not being a normal person, who knows. There was defo no scientifically basis it was said upon

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:45:39 2017 No.9046036 >>9046031 the hotdog on its own would be much better for him. In the US, our bread is like cake

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:47:23 2017 No.9046040 >>9045862 ?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:48:06 2017 No.9046042 >>9046036 im in the uk so im not sure if the bread is the same here but i agree

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 13:51:13 2017 No.9046045

>>9045823

The detailed report (which you have to pay for) gets into how to interpret scores for the different subtests. I won't argue that having a professional administer and analyze your test isn't more accurate, but the statistical summary proves the scores given are sufficiently accurate.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:02:15 2017 No.9046065 >>9045945 147 IQ checking in. Milkshakes not only have higher viscosity but colder temperature. A milkshake is the only listed drink that must stay cold to remain what it is.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:04:11 2017 No.9046068 >>9045914 what was the exact question? i don't remember the precise wording, but it was to single out an object that's the "most different" from the remaining four. not to pick a criterion by which the other four are the most similar.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:31:55 2017 No.9046118 >>9045364 Same. did the mensa example one and coldnt do tons of it as there were too many viable options

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:37:49 2017 No.9046126 150 again >>9045841 >>9045864 >>9045887 >>9046065 Why is everyone referring to such weird properties for this milkshake question? Isn't it milkshake is the odd one out as it is a mixed/prepared drink and all the others are just 'as is'?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:38:47 2017 No.9046129 >>9046126 honestly, you could also say it's beer because beer is the only one that bubbles. Just a stupid question.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:40:00 2017 No.9046130 >>9046129 not all beer bubbles - ales don't

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:40:45 2017 No.9046131 >>9046126 >Why is everyone referring to such weird properties for this milkshake question? are you really surprised this board is inhabited by autists?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:41:34 2017 No.9046133 >>9044261 Does this test take into account age from the questionnaire at the end?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:45:49 2017 No.9046138 >>9046126 idk, when I saw it, I had about a two-second visualization where I was faced with all of the liquids being poured, and the milkshake just outed itself as being more akin to a dessert that required extra baggage

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:46:42 2017 No.9046140 Brainlet here. What's the idea behind the "what comes next in the pattern of shapes" style questions? I feel like Lisa Simpson. They make no fucking sense at all to me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:46:52 2017 No.9046141 >>9045331 >>9045678

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:47:03 2017 No.9046143

>>9046126

listen Mr. 150.

the question was to pick the odd one out. two are dairy, two are alcohol, and the last one was juice.

milkshake is similar to milk, so it isn't the odd one out.

if milkshake was the "correct" answer, then maybe brainlets shouldn't write IQ tests.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:51:32 2017 No.9046151
File: 9 KB, 452x230, 1500192280196.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9046143
>the question was to pick the odd one out. two are dairy, two are alcohol, and the last one was juice.
>milkshake is similar to milk, so it isn't the odd one out.
horrible reasoning, how does 'least like the other four' make you think like this? you might as well be arguing something as dumb as 'whiskey is the only one with two vowels'

use your brain.

>if milkshake was the "correct" answer, then maybe brainlets shouldn't write IQ tests.
please get your autism diagnosed

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:54:26 2017 No.9046160 >>9046151 even number of vowels* i meant

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 14:59:07 2017 No.9046170

>>9046131
True but I feel like you don't even have to be smart to reason that a general IQ test isn't going to test for (relatively niche) concepts from the average person. Scientific knowledge is not as expected from people as being well read for eg

>>9046138
Fair, desu I didnt even consider viscosity (and may not be right) but you can have runny milkshake depending on the recipe and high pulp juice can be more viscous than it.

>>9046143
>pick the odd one out
of the other FOUR
>two are....two are
doesn't link all the others together

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:00:09 2017 No.9046172 >>9046170 why did t.b.h. turn into desu?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:01:26 2017 No.9046174 File: 11 KB, 452x230, what am I doing with my life.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9046151

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:03:21 2017 No.9046181 got 136, but not a native speaker. There were some words I didn't know, I guess it would have been slightly higher if it was in my native language

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:03:34 2017 No.9046184 >>9046172 >why did t.b.h. turn into desu? you new around these parts?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:07:26 2017 No.9046199

>>9045958
Wait, can't there be only two relatives? The question doesn't state that the fathers are fathers to the sons in the restaurant. So if there's only 3 families (father-son, father, son), they'll all bring home 3 bags in total.
That was my reasoning, at least. I didn't even think that the father can also be a son.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:08:13 2017 No.9046200 Is Mensa's online test reliable? https://www.mensa.lu/en/mensa/online-iq-test.html

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:11:08 2017 No.9046202 >>9046199 I approached it like father and son is a designation applicable to all subjects, so two sons is the hard upper limit on the number of people possible

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:11:10 2017 No.9046203

>>9046170
>doesn't link all the others together

the question does not express or imply that they need to be "linked".

since it is a beverage and the test does not assume scientific knowlege, we should go by taste and basic composition. spirits taste similar and are similarly made. milkshakes and milk have similar ingredients and taste. juice is the only odd one out.

dunno what to tell you

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:12:03 2017 No.9046205

>>9046170
>>9046151
>>9046143
This is why on big boy IQ tests you have to give your reasoning on this kind of question.
Like "milk because it's white" might give you one point b/c milkshakes can be white, but "milkshake because it's thicker" might give you two points.

They probably just chose the most common highest scoring answer and made that correct. Juice and milkshake might both be worth full points. I don't know the methodology used for this question.

You're all retards for not realizing this simple shit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:13:09 2017 No.9046208 >>9046184 Just a hardcore lurker from like 04/5 - 08 & only came back more than on n off like last year. Also only reply to things here & some discussions in b rarely.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:14:09 2017 No.9046211 >>9045437 I skipped some questions because I am at work on my lunch break and though 30 min was the limit. I skipped about 7-8 questions. How would that affect my score?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:16:42 2017 No.9046221 >>9045983 you can't be serious...

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:28:55 2017 No.9046248 >>9045437 >not your performance under stress >less than one hour I did it in half an hour, without paper or a calculator, while occasionally talking to my mother and I got a 130. Am I a genius?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:32:27 2017 No.9046259

>>9046203
"Which one of the following five is least like the other four?"

Idk to me that means: which one does not share feature(s) with all of the others. These questions are (almost always?) looking for 1st order logic that is self contained within the question.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:34:37 2017 No.9046263 >>9044749 If you're that self aware I don't think it can be very bad

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:35:23 2017 No.9046266 >>9046248 >talking to mom >genius ye ive got a bad news for you my dude

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:38:29 2017 No.9046272 File: 245 KB, 664x800, feelspic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Mean = 109.59 >Standard Deviation = 18.67 Shouldn't have read that. Now I feel like a brainlet having scored 147, which is pretty much just 2-sigma.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:39:54 2017 No.9046275 File: 32 KB, 460x334, 905692.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9046248 > kid Talking to mom > Look Mom. I'm trolling 4chan again!

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:44:29 2017 No.9046286 >>9046272 You're a brainlet, but not for the reason you think it is. Read the OP, the scores are already converted back into your typical 15-point STD score.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:51:55 2017 No.9046302

>>9046203

Taste is a poor choice as milkshakes can have a variable taste depending on their ingredients. Also gin and whiskey can and do not taste similar at all imo.

It can'r be 'types' because you can have types of juice and milkshakes (and all the others)

Composition in terms of ingredients gin, whiskey, and juice are made using plants. Milk Milkshake are obviously linked so cannot divide using that.

Composition in terms of preparation however only milkshakes require the mixing of ingredients to create it - at the level of a lay person. You can go to your fridge/cupboard and immediately pour a glass of all of them apart from a milkshake.

Moreover it is made up of one of the other entries in the list which none of the others are that immediately sets it apart from all of the others and you don't need to pair the other entries and then eliminate based on "not a member of a pair"

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 15:55:48 2017 No.9046311 >>9046302 whatever man

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:06:55 2017 No.9046338 134 but the test is pretty retarded, got a few answers just because of specific experience like using an augur one time etc.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:07:13 2017 No.9046341

>>9046311
Surely you can see that (whoever's right or wrong) judging based on individual intrinsic properties of each item first before moving on to the creation of subsets & then exclusion due to that is the correct way to proceed with these questions.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:08:27 2017 No.9046345 >>9046302 I went with milkshake because it is the one a random person in their kitchen would have to "prepare" while the others would be in bottles.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:16:38 2017 No.9046363 tfw took one of these tests and scored 99% with perfect answers on a specific spatial portion but avg in the others. Sucks being an outlier with 1 ridiculously strong area and average verbal.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:19:29 2017 No.9046373 >>9046345 That's pretty much exactly what i did. I've had to think about the Q far more here than in the test aha

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:21:37 2017 No.9046380

>>9046341

well, naturally. you need some metric to define similarity or difference. since you're not given any such metric to work with, peoples answers can vary based on particular notions of "different".

i would say that most people group beverages by their ingredients and composition, for example, dairy and alcohol. viscosity on the other hand is not the first thing to come to mind, but fine, it's a valid answer.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:28:01 2017 No.9046393 also don't lecture me. it's annoying.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:33:53 2017 No.9046411

>>9044261

the iq test is also heavily biased in our favor. we probably all know what reflections and other spatial transformations do, we know logic, and we're fairly well-read. these are things we've thought about and visualized many times. of course we're going to do well. you can't measure an educated person with this test.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:35:29 2017 No.9046414

>>9046380

NB Didnt do it on viscosity but on 'preparation' like >>9046345

Yeah I get that. I just think these questions are actually "remove one member and find the name of the resulting set". Mine would be something like "the set of drinks that require no preparation beforehand" whereas yours would be more like "the set of sets of drinks based on primary ingredient". I just feel that for an IQ test the simpler answer probably has the most strength. But that's just how I approach these questions.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:35:31 2017 No.9046415 >>9045504 http://www.statisticbrain.com/iq-estimates-by-intended-college-major/ http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/average-iq-of-students-by-college-major-and-gender-ratio/

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:36:06 2017 No.9046418 >>9046140 It was the alphabet rotated 90 degrees counter clockwise. Choose the next letter.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:37:32 2017 No.9046422 >>9045871 Is the filed they ask you to download legit?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:40:01 2017 No.9046430

>>9044261
Reaction time tests can function as an iq test. More so with tests that test reaction time with very simple puzzles or questions but even just reaction times with pressing a button when the light turn green works.
Also there are plenty of pdf file iq tests but that's not what people mean when they say online. They mean Facebook normie garbage. The triple nine society has a list of excellent iq tests. Very obscure and very objective non verbal ones are listed there. Checkout the list.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:41:48 2017 No.9046434 File: 68 KB, 1920x816, brainletswillneverlearn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >This thread

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:42:53 2017 No.9046436 >>9046430 Can you link those triple nine society tests?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:46:58 2017 No.9046449
File: 80 KB, 1078x582, Screen Shot 2017-07-18 at 1.45.45 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Alright I'm black and post on 4chan so this is almost certainly not an accurate test. There is no way I am in the 99th percentile of IQ. The fact that it tries to get you to pay for it after is bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:49:06 2017 No.9046456 seems like this test has been debunked by most of the posts here, can anyone post a real one (preferably free)?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:49:23 2017 No.9046458 >>9046205 >big boy IQ tests >he literally can't even identify and vet online IQ tests for statistical validity on his own >he literally needs a psychologist to hold his hand the entire way through the test and interpret it for him

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:53:09 2017 No.9046467 >>9046436 http://www.triplenine.org/HowtoJoin/TestScores.aspx

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:56:31 2017 No.9046481 >>9045437 >>9045437 Shouldn't have skipped half the test with "I don't know" then Also I have the horrible habit of thinking in english when I'm reading english, which isn't my native language 120 by the way

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:57:31 2017 No.9046483 >>9046449 I agree, you seem pretty fucking stupid.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 16:58:49 2017 No.9046485 File: 149 KB, 1200x1167, DEEg9ZoV0AAMk2k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9046483 thx

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 17:08:04 2017 No.9046509 >>9046456 >seems like this test has been debunked by most of the posts here An disagreement concerning an inductive reasoning question about milkshakes on 4chan does not trump the statistical analysis validating the test.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 17:23:21 2017 No.9046545 >>9045159 ahhh fuck. this one stumped me too.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 17:26:38 2017 No.9046554 I got 94

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 17:27:14 2017 No.9046556 >>9046414 sure, but that's a distinct problem from finding the one that doesn't belong what if someone doesn't drink and is lactose intolerant? juice would very likely stand out to that person. the question should be re-written

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 17:49:15 2017 No.9046606

>>9046556
>sure, but that's a distinct problem from finding the one that doesn't belong
That's where I'd disagree with you.

>someone doesn't drink and is lactose intolerant
That, to me, is trying to apply a social context to an analytical question (part of the issue with IQ tests to begin with). It may standout to them for their personal social biases but the test/question is trying to measure logical reasoning. That;'s another reason why I'd pick preparation over taste. You only need to be familiar with the concept of a milkshake to know it is the only drink you have to make first. They are not disadvantaged in finding that answer. I would say that being able to divorce personal experience from the logical requirements of the question is part of the test as you can apply a bias to pretty much any question - this obviously has much bigger issues when applied to different culture groups globally etc etc.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:01:19 2017 No.9046632

>>9046606

>the test/question is trying to measure logical reasoning

Just to be more specific, the question is trying to measure inductive reasoning. Test takers can come up with a myriad of reasons why any one of the beverages is different from the other four, but you're not trying to determine which one is different; you're trying to determine which one is the most different. AKA if the test taker were to rank order the beverages in terms of how many differences they can list, they should choose the one with the most differences (or greatest differences). The question is about weighing probabilities which is why it throws so many people off. Most people don't intuitively understand probability.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:38:10 2017 No.9046710

>>9046632

again, you need a measure of difference, but none is given. you are left to come up with your own definition of how "different" these things are and how they compare. each element besides juice had some other analog in the list. whiskey-gin, milk-milkshake, juice-?

that was my thought process.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:46:01 2017 No.9046724

>>9046456
no duh, you have to get a pro done IQ test. They take long periods of time. This one is just heavily correlated to IQ results.

IQ tests are important for general aptitude and for large populations/sample sizes. This IQ test for instance used on 20,000,000 Americans would give great insights and results with predictive power.

Even if it has flaws it's still applicable.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:47:36 2017 No.9046729 >>9046710 It's a weak one. You are looking for the strongest one. Whiskey-Gin milk-Milkshake is a very weak pattern.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:50:22 2017 No.9046739 >>9046729 it is not. in fact, i'm certain it was the right answer. >inb4 dunning-krueger

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:52:48 2017 No.9046745

>>9046729
I'll explain more. You took a set of 5 things. Then you grouped them into pairs of somewhat similarity on a vague notion. Then you imagined there was no 6th thing to match with juice. This is a huge amount of more reasoning and "loose".

There are 5 objects. Relationship to each other in either consistency or preparation is much more important.

A similar example: Banana, Asparagus, Carrot, Celery, Salad

The salad pops out right away, but the weaker pattern is to pick banana. While viable, the relationship of salad compared to individual items is stronger than the one mostly not vegetables.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:53:20 2017 No.9046746 File: 210 KB, 772x908, beanmoon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] sub-100 IQ filters >le doggiebags sub-120 IQ filters >le milkshakes

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:55:53 2017 No.9046749 >>9046746 I got the doggiebag one wrong, didn't stop to think about it at all.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:57:17 2017 No.9046753 >>9046745 This basically a reformulation of my argument with sets and nested sets

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:58:00 2017 No.9046756 >>9046753 Your argument is a "harder" transform. It's incorrect in this case.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:59:01 2017 No.9046758

>>9046756
What I mean is, yes you can argue for it, but the argument is weak. It's not about facts or not, you can come up with some insane formula to get any result as the answer for any of these questions. It's about finding the simplest and most reasonable explanation. In effect, trying to emulate the test maker's brain.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:59:50 2017 No.9046759 >>9046756 My argument arrives at Milkshake being the odd one out. What is the 'corret ' answer then?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 18:59:51 2017 No.9046760 >>9046745 except gin and whiskey also require a good amount of preparation. you just listed four raw ingredients and "salad" whiskey and gin are not naturally occurring

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:00:59 2017 No.9046761

>>9046759
nevermind, milkshake is the right answer, thought I was talking to the juice person.

It's similar on legal matters, you can come up with things that logically could be the pattern but common sense is more important. Legal stuff is a joke though.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:01:09 2017 No.9046762 File: 105 KB, 425x476, 1491420168106.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9046760 >except gin and whiskey also require a good amount of preparation.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:02:02 2017 No.9046763 >>9046760 Juice can be prepared too. It's not about "exactness". It's just the strongest relation/pattern.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:06:05 2017 No.9046771

>>9046760
Not the guy you quoted (150 from earlier on). Yes but that is where you have to employ a level of social context. Spirits are prepared in distilleries. That preparation is separate from the level of prep required for a milkshake which is done just before consumption (generally). I agree with >>9046763
it is about weighting the strength of these relations to inform your decision making process. Hence my sets within sets saying that was a weaker association than the set of prep free drinks

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:13:34 2017 No.9046783

>>9045329
Forgot to reply to this earlier. Because the tests are designed such that the mean should be around 60/65. Having not seen an american test I'd assume that that means that we have less 'fluff' questions at the start just to get scores up. It's been those bounds for at least 40 years so they must work

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:22:39 2017 No.9046803 File: 75 KB, 1106x550, Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 00.50.00.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I cheated on some of the word ones though. How is vocabulary important for IQ if it's just knowing definitions?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:40:17 2017 No.9046833 >>9046761 As a guy with a master in law, I can confirm legal matters are 100% a joke.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:41:51 2017 No.9046836 >>9046803 >ulary important for I crystallised intelligence is how well read you are, so fairly

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:44:37 2017 No.9046842 File: 40 KB, 1195x503, 2017-07-16 15_53_07-Psychtests Profile.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >tfw to smart to get +140 IQ Hello darkness, my old friend...

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:52:07 2017 No.9046861 What is he margin of error for a test like this?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 19:52:08 2017 No.9046862

>>9046833
It's not surprising considering the language used is so outdated. Computer science methdology and techniques could be applied and make a much better system.

Problem is AI will be supreme in not too long so it's pointless to bother even trying to change it. It's an interesting system though but also completely stupid to anyone decently intelligent. There are flaws all over my state's laws and revisions etc. To navigate it, I had to rely on a lot of emulation of stupid brains.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:05:20 2017 No.9046894 >>9046803 If you had to cheat on a question like "What is the antonym of irreverent?" then your IQ is in the fucking gutter. You don't need to be well-read to not be a fucking moron.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:12:32 2017 No.9046906 I'm the guy from the last thread who got a perfect composite score of 155. Am I really the smartest person on /sci/? I guess that's like being king of the retards, but it's still pretty sweet.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:12:41 2017 No.9046907

>>9046862

There are numerous flaws with how the legal system functions. First, no one thinks of the legal system as a logical system, which it is, or in terms of CS. Secondly, almost all of the legislators don't think about the economical aspects of law, where instituting a law changes people's behaviours, and they don't bother to look, when adopting new laws, or when judge makes judgments, about the risk of contradictions within the legal system. Problems pop out everywhere, so they multiply the rules without any logic behind that. Interpretation of law is completely memetic and people use arguments that suit them just to reach the conclusions they like most. The system could be much better, but still uses outdated ideas (which never should have existed in the first place). It's so bad, I'd have to write like a whole fucking book on why it's bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:29:21 2017 No.9046935 >>9046906 >155 >the smartest One test,doesn't realise no higher mark. Apparently no

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:48:13 2017 No.9046967

>>9046907
Yeah, my idea for a legal/law system is just computer science modified slightly. Functions have an added "Jurisdiction" aka entity that is in charge of it. It's also slightly based on how game engines work as well although abstractly.

For instance functions with jurisdiction police would exist at all times in a loop between you and another person. Function Don'tAssault (Person Person) with jurisdiction Police. When someone breaks the functions aka assaults someone when the police would interdict and error handle/etc it.

You could imagine the USA gov as a bunch of functions with criss crossed jursidictions, aka impeachment of president with jurisdiction, senate, etc.

It's interesting, but I thought it up when imagining how to interface government/law smoothly with AI. Too lazy to really do anything with it though except the concept. One problem is AI and other things are so powerful other things become semi pointless

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 20:59:38 2017 No.9046984 >>9044261 >POSTMORTEM >"after death" wat

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:01:47 2017 No.9046987

>>9046967

There's also a problem with how you'd validate which functions are legitimate and which are not, so you'd still need a ''meta''legislator to determine that (the process through which a new function could be implemented). It's interesting, because I never thought of it in terms of policing, always in terms of judging, where the judge would exercise a function in which you input data (facts) and which outputs, depending on the set of facts, a judgment. Also, I'm not sure how you'd implement vague rules. Like reasonable standards and the likes.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:14:40 2017 No.9047009

>>9046987
Well, the primary benefit is in the resource allocation side of things (money). Tracing it all as it goes across the system and creating good visualizations. The idea was you allow each taxpayer to allocate a insignificant portion of their taxes (not specified by amount), to some part of the system so they would look at the visualization and have some idea of how the system worked.

You would essentially want to functionalize the entire society. Not just government, but every little thing. It's fucked up though but by doing so you would get realtime data and signals to be more responsive to supply/demands.

It would take a long to explain and I probably would not convey it accurately.

For criminal side you can visualize it as lines between you and every other person and property with functions in loops. If you break the loop, a crime is committed.

So a function is active with me and a random car I walk past. If I destroy/fuck with it and am not the owner of the property I have broken the function.

The underlying idea is to essentially recreate reality abstractly and run it similar to a game engine. Digitizing everything.

At this point things like crime become similar to cheats in a video game. The entire point was to interface more cleanly with AI, but as AI grows that becomes less important aside from the alignment of interests problem.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:20:57 2017 No.9047017 >>9046746 Doggiebag is True rite?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:23:04 2017 No.9047022

>>9047009
aka in stupid conceptual pseudocode, although I forgot some of the specifics and how I thought it up to handle special cases

Function Don't kill with parameters (person, person) and jurisdiction police.

You can imagine the instantiation of the "server" being applying this to all people which can be done in numerous ways with for/while loops etc.

Criminal law would be written as a collection of functions like this, exceptions, etc just like any software rather than current legalese.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:31:35 2017 No.9047035 >>9046984 Come on, man. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmortem_documentation

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:33:55 2017 No.9047037 >>9047017 >Doggiebag is True rite? what do you think?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:41:49 2017 No.9047048

>>9047009
>>9047022

I don't think I'm well-versed enough in CS to fully appreciate your idea, and I'm not sure I fully understand it, so please tell me if I'm wrong, but how would you break the loop? Like how would it determine whether or not you had the intention to destroy the car you were passing by, and you weren't say mentally ill or forced to do so? And how would you digitize everything?

Your second post is more how I was thinking about it, with rewriting law as any software, but I think your idea goes further than that.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 21:45:31 2017 No.9047055 I'd love to test myself but the website just shit out on me.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:09:10 2017 No.9047099

>>9047048
I just gave a simple example. Let's say you had a collection of functions similar to criminal law.

Assault
Sexual Assault
etc

A way to handle them is to describe a function.

"DoNotMurder"

The function DoNotMurder would describe not killing someone etc.

Now the parameters of DoNotMurder would be for instance (person, person)

DoNotMurder (Dave, Emily)
Dave DoNotMurder Emily ;; C++ style ordering

This would be a function. You can imagine it as a continually executed function inside a while loop. So for instance, Dave Do Not Murder Emily is always executed function. If This function is broken, for instance Dave Murders Emily. Something similar to an error exception is created. This error exception or with a different wording, would then be handled through another system, like Courts which you can create like any software.

The key point is "Jurisdiction" concept though. Instead of a computer executing these functions. People/AI are tasked with executing them. So the function above, DoNotMurder would have Jurisdiction of Police. Police would attempt their best to enforce that the said function executes correctly, aka no murder is committed. If a murder is committed, they would handle the error (arrest/persecute and send it up the chain).

The entire core idea though is imagine the software execution enforced by a vast diverse system of "Jurisdictions" which can be humans/AI/computers. Whereas software typically is done by very logical/deterministic/non individual CPUs.

The clearest similar system is how game engines work, and they even include humans in the process usually with some jurisdiction like GMs/support.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:19:27 2017 No.9047120 >>9047099 Ah this makes perfect sense, thanks for clearly it up.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:20:28 2017 No.9047121 got a 127 bit disappointed

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:23:52 2017 No.9047125

>>9047099
on the topic of "everything digitized". I literally mean that. No cash purchases, everything tracked, entire flow of resources in society known realtime, Cameras tracking everything with computer vision to see faces/gaits/intentions/etc. From this you centralize all this data similar to exactly how a game server would track things, delta ticks, etc.

Once digitized, Machine learning could do wonders. Of course this will happen regardless it will just require more years.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:29:00 2017 No.9047136 >>9047121 Me too, its never enough i guess.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:36:16 2017 No.9047144 >>9047136 >>9047121 yeah, even in the 1% it really just floors me that when I go to college, probably 100+ people there are smarter than I am or about the same.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:40:58 2017 No.9047154
File: 89 KB, 1186x722, 1474082892274.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9045967
Chart the schedules.
No employee works at the other task in the same day.
David works accounting Monday through Wednesday, and Neil has 4-day weekends (assume Friday and Monday off because of the term "standard work week")

This means only Cathy is available to work on Friday in accounting.

>>9045982
The 57th question was a slap in the face.

>two sons and two fathers, three bags
A Grandfather, his son also a Father, and as well his son go to dinner.

If the correlations are accurate in this thread I'd say it was well worth the $7 for a generalized methodology, although 57 questions ain't much to glean from and I doubt an averaged score across the five major tests would give me any higher than 130-135. MENSA never messaged me back some years ago.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:45:09 2017 No.9047162

>>9047125

Oh. Well alright, that clears a lot of things up, this is quite where I was wondering what you'd meant. I was wondering if you meant literally every digitized or if you meant that the legal system would be digitized (like the laws and their applications in front those who have jurisdiction). But how would you make such a system and maintain it? That would require a lot of resources and processing power. It would be ridiculously expensive, so much so that it probably would outway its benefits. Not to mention it's scary to think of. And how would a CPU check intentions?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 22:52:12 2017 No.9047172 >>9047144 Why not just look at Terence Taos publications and have a little existential crisis while we are at it ?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:02:26 2017 No.9047181 >>9047144 There's always someone higher up the food chain. Maturity is realizing and accepting just how worthless and interchangeable we all really are.

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:16:34 2017 No.9047206

>>9044261
I'm actually just sitting here and laughing that you /sci/ tards got jewed again. There was literally no difficult question. It's just plain old computational problems. There was nothing to think about. The iqtest.dk actually had questions where you needed to find patterns, this one is just idiotic word trivia. Everyone who paid is retard, and then you ask yourselves why the fuck are jew smarter.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:21:11 2017 No.9047214 >>9047206 So what'd you get on this one, like 117?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:23:55 2017 No.9047221 >>9047214 >REEEEEE WHY DID I GET 115? >REEEEEEEEEEEE

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:26:39 2017 No.9047229
File: 95 KB, 245x282, 1489695240892.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9047221
These are definitely not the responses of someone you'd hold in high esteem, so what makes you think we are going to listen to the petulant unfounded ramblings of an emotional child?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:29:15 2017 No.9047231 >>9047035 >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmortem_documentation >This article is about technical project documentation. ...written by semi-literate techies. Protip: don't speak/write like them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:34:24 2017 No.9047239 I thought it was because milk, juice and gin are their own liquid so to speak, wheras a milkshake is milk + syrup

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:36:03 2017 No.9047242 >>9047206 >>9047221 1 SD untermensch confirmed

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:36:31 2017 No.9047244 >>9047239 Milkshake is the only answer that is not a total liquid.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:38:41 2017 No.9047247 >>9047239 >milk + syrup A milkshake is mostly milk + ice cream, what the hell are you talking about with syrup?

Anonymous Tue Jul 18 23:46:23 2017 No.9047261

>>9047206
>post a IQ test with easy questions and high results
>sci bites and brags about getting top 1% on a stupid internet IQ test

was this the plan? I agree the questions are retarded. The math series are braindead ones like +2,+3,+4 etc and the rotations/spatial all simple.

Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:38:48 2017 No.9047309

>>9047261
>>9047206

These are fairly difficult questions for your average person with an IQ of 100. You have to recognize your own bias: just because something is easy for you does not mean it's easy for everyone else. Unless if you're measuring a high IQ population, harder questions don't make an IQ test more accurate. IQ tests are all about sampling an average population and then calculating your percentile rank from the distribution of scores. People who score highly on these tests feel let down because they don't feel like they overcame anything difficult to achieve it, and it's because they didn't. But that doesn't invalidate their results.

Not being able to pick up on this suggests you're somewhere on the spectrum and only slightly above average intelligence. You can't relate to average people.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:38:56 2017 No.9047310 >>9045958 >2 fathers DONT BE A JUDGMENTAL HOMOPHOBE YOU PRICK

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:41:14 2017 No.9047314 the question was clearly biased against those raised in two-father households. i want my money back.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:43:33 2017 No.9047318 Why don't you guys just post your ACT scores or something, according to Triple Nine and that """Philosophers""" society a 34 (post-1995 or something) gets you something around 145. Beats me why the latest SATs don't count, though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:44:38 2017 No.9047321 >>9044261 there's a max of four bags and a min of two

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:45:40 2017 No.9047322 >>9047321 meant for >>9045958

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:46:16 2017 No.9047324 >>9047318 You can study for current tests and learn all the tricks to raise your score so I don't think it correlates much anymore

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 00:49:46 2017 No.9047328 How important were the definition questions I had never heard of most of those words in my life

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 01:05:39 2017 No.9047350 >>9047244 Juice has pulp/pith in it Milk is a colloidal suspension of fat in water

Anonymous Wed Jul 19 02:26:58 2017 No.9047416

>>9044261
>>9044261
>This previous thread proved that this is a legit online IQ test.
No it didn't.

>Dunning-Kruger Effect
Has nothing to do with high scorers thinking they should have scored lower. that is entirely your own made up idea with no research to back it up.

I wonder how many high scorers shelled out a few $ to see how smart they are without being sceptical of the validity, or who is making these threads advertising this site.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 02:44:44 2017 No.9047428 >>9047350 This was my thinking as well. But realistically you can cut it any way, there are just too many ways to categorize them. It seems like many people chose milkshake because choosing juice would have been too easy of an answer.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 03:40:28 2017 No.9047509 >>9047428 That's why preparation is the strongest line of reasoning

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 04:34:04 2017 No.9047560 >>9045579 issokay anon, who cares what a test says if you can do the work? Some of these questions (esp the math-based ones) are easier if you've gotten further along in math, since you already have an idea what to look for.

Anonymous Wed Jul 19 08:14:16 2017 No.9047819

>>9047416

OP here, not a shill for the site. I made both threads to disprove that the myth that there are no valid online IQ tests. The Denmark and Norway IQ tests are legit as well, although they measure different aspects of intelligence.

The only issue I'll take with anyone who thinks this test is bullshit is that almost none have been able to or have been willing to critique the statistical analysis indicating it's legit. The best argument I've seen put forward was that sampling bias (due to it being online) made the results invalid, but we now know they controlled for that. Arguing that the questions are too easy or that the test gives high scores to increase sales are entirely irrelevant in the face of its statistical validity and it complying with APA guidelines.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 08:54:19 2017 No.9047857 >>9047819 >Denmark and Norway IQ tests Link?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 09:22:53 2017 No.9047892 >>9047857 Norway is test.mensa.no Denmark is iqtest.dk They're not as culturally biased due to just being Raven's progressive matrices tests but they don't measure verbal IQ.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 09:28:41 2017 No.9047894 >>9047892 Thanks.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 10:40:03 2017 No.9047971 >>9047819 Got 120 on this test and 138 on the Norwegian one.. Am i retardet?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 11:12:34 2017 No.9048011 >>9047971 No, it just means your analytical/abstract reasoning is much higher than your verbal reasoning. Neither of the Scandinavian ones measure verbal but psychtests.com does.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 11:17:39 2017 No.9048020 Isn't fast thinking one of the hallmarks of intelligence? Should we really trust a test with no time limit?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 11:21:09 2017 No.9048023 >>9045958 One person is both a father and a son.

Anonymous Wed Jul 19 11:37:04 2017 No.9048054

>>9048020

Speed isn't important when measuring an average population if the questions are sufficiently difficult. If anything test makers should throw out any tests from sampling that aren't completed within a set timeframe, like 30-90 minutes. Other than that it shouldn't matter.

Measuring speed would be useful for measuring extremely high IQ populations though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 13:44:04 2017 No.9048258 >>9044261 How the fuck this thread has 300 replies? Are the majority of /sci/ a bunch of insecure undergraduates? Holy fuck this is pathetic

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 14:07:04 2017 No.9048334 >>9048258 t. sociocultural anthropology grad student

Anonymous Wed Jul 19 18:01:29 2017 No.9048843

>>9045491
How the fuck do you manage that, i got 140 even though i skipped the entire english glossary test.

English isnt my native language, and i rarely read english book, i dont see how it affects how intelligent i am. Im probably like top 50% in english, but top 99% in Norwegian and german.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 19 18:45:21 2017 No.9048927 >>9044261 Is there any data on variables like time of day, empty or full stomach, caffeination, etc?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math