7 of 8 when I first took it, IIRC (it was late 2016). I just retook it and got 8/8.
What do our (supposed) intellectual elite know about human progress? Repost: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=165938533888688&id=100014176268390 … Intro excerpted belowpic.twitter.com/DRaMaYqnNy
-
-
-
So off the top of your head, you knew the percentage of under one year olds vaccinated against measles +- 10%, global electricity availability +- 10% and the global rate of primary school attendance by girls +- 10%? Do you work in public health?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
. @deftly_admiral points out that the statistics of the responses have changed since I wrote this (14 months ago), and are now a little bit better than random. Still very unimpressive, but would at least outperform a random number generator.
Show this thread -
A fair number of people seem to take this as personally impugning them if they get a low score. But with just 8 questions & s'times fine-grained categories, it's a mistake to read too much into an individual result (high or low). The overall statistics, OTOH, do seem interesting
Show this thread - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The charts aren't created or used like that, though. They aggregate giant winners with modest losers, and carefully pick timeframes to emphasize growth. They ignore decadal and large subgroup reversals. They shout down dissent, and say that we have no problems/everything is fine.
-
Only a fool would use these kinds of statistics to argue that everything is fine and we have no problems. But it would also be foolish to ignore these statistics, and not to try to understand what's going on.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The fortune of their guild depends on being needed, which in turn depends on a sense of crisis and enlightened rescue. Only, there's no crisis, and the "philosopher kings" are self-serving impostors who regularly make things worse.
-
Just because some of those numbers are better than people expect doesn't mean there aren't real crises. Eg the numbers on extreme poverty have gotten a lot better, and that should be celebrated, but at the same time that level (about $2/day) is a very low bar.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
3/8 (although some multiple choice were 'close') I guess don't listen to anything I have to say about global development ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
Heh. As I say elsewhere in thread, the number of questions is so small and the categories fine-grained enough that I'm not sure n=1 results have much meaning (could just be good or bad luck). Collectively, though, I think the stats are interesting.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.