Original title was “A big Seattle name is in the election battlegrounds — helping Trump” which I editorialized primarily to better explain who Kshama Sawant is over the generic “a big Seattle name”.
Original title was “A big Seattle name is in the election battlegrounds — helping Trump” which I editorialized primarily to better explain who Kshama Sawant is over the generic “a big Seattle name”.
There is no such thing as a “crazy smart” accelerationist. By definition they don’t have a firm grasp of reality or the fate of most successful accelerationists.
There are a lot of smart people who don’t have a firm grasp on reality.
Bruh, IQ isn’t just one number, people are just talking about the average…
And risk assessment isn’t even part of it, but I think it should be personally.
Hell, for the last part I’d point out that most people with a really high IQ are considered not to have firm grasp on reality.
It legitimately doesn’t take that rare of an IQ until you’re at the point where Idiocracy has been happening for decades. It’s my main argument against a governmental system where the smartest lead. There’s a lot of human variation and ignorance is bliss is a saying for a reason.
Really smart people are often incredibly jaded and misanthropic.
From her point of view and the timeline she may be looking at. This could be like putting toilet water on the plants even tho it doesn’t have electrolytes.
Maybe she’s right. I don’t think she is. But I can see the argument
I never said anything about IQ. IQ is a bullshit measure.
I don’t think accelerationists are intelligent because they don’t understand the consequences of their actions.
So…
Do you think “intelligence” is real?
And do you understand that it’s not one thing that’s equally distributed, people have strengths in some areas like associative memory, processing speed, critical thinking, or long term memory?