You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Viliam comments on Open thread, Nov. 02 - Nov. 08, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: MrMind 02 November 2015 10:07AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (194)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ChristianKl 04 November 2015 06:40:35PM 4 points [-]

Mathematicians don't give a shit about IQ.

I don't claim that they do.

Clarity speaks of himself as stupid and the fact that he failed to learn python is indication of that. If his IQ is <100, I think that would be a valid ground on which to advice him against seeking a career in machine learning.

That's exactly the purpose for which IQ test were designed.

Comment author: Viliam 05 November 2015 08:22:51AM 1 point [-]

Clarity speaks of himself as stupid

This is only a weak evidence for non-high IQ.

I know a few people who had bad opinion about their IQ, and when I convinced them to take the test, they scored above 130. It's because they believed the stereotype of "high IQ = math prodigy", and they happened to be average at math simply because they focused their lives on something else.

Comment author: ChristianKl 05 November 2015 09:47:17AM 0 points [-]

This is only a weak evidence for non-high IQ.

I haven't implied that it's strong evidence, for me the available evidence was enough to raise the question. The answer to that question matters for whether or not to tell him not to seek a career in machine learning.

I do think that for this purpose the testing that tells him that he's above average in math might be enough.