I do not believe that testing for the ability to perform a task without actually observing someone performing the task for real is a trivial task And I believe the idea that one can test *generally* for the ability to "perform tasks" (the g-factor) is false
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
You may not believe it, but the scientific evidence is extremely strong that the correlation between the g-factor and the ability to perform cognitive tasks is large. The problem that observing someone is often extremely costly and/or hard. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @arthur_affect and
When you demand the unreasonable, people usually start cheating (as a Stalinist, that should be familiar to you). We pretty consistently see that the alternative to general testing is influence peddling, benefiting the rich and powerful. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
Yup, the problem with all other methods of social sorting is they're all "subjective" and "irrational" and therefore benefit the already-powerful But standardized testing just measures objective truths and puts the people in power who objectively should be there Awesome
2 replies 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
The true positions of power are not usually achieved through testing, but through other means. Your entire argument is false for that reason, because you fail to distinguish between the workers who just do what they are told (most of us) and the few with significant power.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
Yes, under a Marxist analysis a highly paid software engineer in San Francisco is in the "working class" the same as a burger-flipper in Wichita, and the members of the "ruling class" are indeed very few However, the idea that the engineer *has no power* is horseshit
3 replies 2 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
If nothing else, on the small-scale day-to-day level where we live most of the time, *money is power* (I'm still kind of seething over Scott's incredibly headass post where he tried to deny this fact and be like "Hey money is only useful for, like, buying stuff")
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
Now I'm reminded of Justine Tunney suddenly flipping from far-left to far-right (she started off running the Occupy Wall St. Twitter account and website before becoming a hardcore neoreactionary) because people dared say techbros had power
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
"I understand when you say *bankers* and *lawyers* and *politicians* in the 1% wield unelected power over ordinary people's lives But don't you get that people in Google and Facebook aren't wielding power, they're just trying to solve problems?"
2 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
Most people in those companies solve the problems that their superiors tell them to solve. And Facebook is largely a slave to a low margin strategy, although they benefit greatly from some monopolistic advantages. 1/2
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, and bankers, lawyers, and even politicians -- definitely up to the level of even most elected officials below the chief executive level, and honestly arguably even the President himself -- are solving problems someone else gave them to solve
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.