Took the survey + all the extra questions. I just noticed this thread today. In my opinion, it is underadvertised.

Concerning the IQ test, I've seen this one before and I know it's not reliable, because it is not based on a statistic and there's no reason to believe it's reliable in the first place. There are only two culture-fair free online IQ tests: JCTI and CFNSE. I am extremely curious to see the average score for LW.

Here's how to make sense out of your IQ score: http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx

How do I improve my persuasion skills?

How do I translate a valid logical argument to a persuasive, intuitive argument that would work for most people? I have read a lot of psychological literature. I have also gotten to the point where I can recognize an intuitive argument that would be persuasive. So, I can recognise my arguments as non-persuasive before I say them and I avoid most debates with people who aren't convinced by scientific evidence and stuff that works for rationalists and is technically a good argument. However, generating a persuasive argument isn't the same as evaluating the persuasiveness of already existing arguments.

Any good, readable, concise literature on this?

Any tips for productivity (links to good articles are highly appreciated)? I was thinking that I knew all the main simple rules, until a few months ago I discovered nootropics.

I have thought about this, to destroy my past erroneous belief that a single vote doesn't make a difference. Imagine that you know a secret that few people know, which tells you that the right candidate to vote is definitely candidate X. All the people who know the secret also might think in the same way as you - that a single vote doesn't matter. But the difference between all of those people voting and no one of them voting is winning the election. So there's the two situations:

1. Nobody votes, you lose the election.
2. Everyone votes, you win the election.

The benefit of your desired party winning the election is greater than the cost to go and vote. But if your vote adds only 0.01% chance of winning, which is not enough to outweigh the time spent for voting, why is it better for everyone who knows the secret if all of them voted?

The answer is that by voting, you don't only increase that chance by 0.01% for you, you also increase it for everyone else. So if there was two of you, you can both vote and each of you will gain a double increase for the same cost. But if you're altruistic, then the most logical thing would be to vote.

Sorry if my idea is repeated in the article or in some of the comments, I didn't read everything.

I remember when a few years ago, on the news on TV, there was an article about how 40-70% (forgot the exact number) of the interviewed people said that Beethoven is a dog. I was frustrated at how shocked the other people in the room were.

I've heard that cover letters are not very popular these days, some people are doing away with them and viewing them as just another thing that can get you rejected.

Before you put a lot of effort into this, you might want to check around and see if anyone even wants cover letters anymore. I know at least one significant company that does not even accept them.

Yes you should be as confident as possible.

In interview, you can admit that you used to have flaws, which you identified and corrected, but this is as close as you can get.

I'm writing my CV now and was wondering whether I should indeed be "as confident as possible" (which basically means, according to some people, that I'm limited to sentences that don't even contain words like "but", "mostly", "although" etc.). Overconfidence is a killer of rationality, and displaying it might signal that you're irrational. I would personally trust much more someone who actively doubts in many things he says, rather than someone who is always confident. However, some people say the opposite.

I was wondering how should I approach my CV? Would it attract more rational employers if it's more self-skeptical? I'm not going to take it to a degree where it's as self-skeptical as I usually get when I give my honest advice on something (pointing out as many assumptions and dependencies on sources of information as possible, and sounding like nobody else I know, based on a very quick search). But still wondering whether this would get me a more irrational employer, and would some of you actually trust more someone who sounds confident.

It looks like you're talking about software engineering, but looking at computer science courses.

I assume they teach mathematics, because it's useful for software engineers.

No, they teach mathematics because it is necessary for computer science. They probably have little care for what is useful to software engineers.

Any good books on mathematics for software engineers? I've been looking at the best universities in UK, they all have much more mathematics in their degree than what I'm taught.

Also, any good books for probability theory and all the things needed for AI development? I'm doing this course: https://www.edx.org/courses/BerkeleyX/CS188.1x/2012_Fall/about

Edit: These are the programs I've been talking about.

Imperial college: http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/ugprospectus/facultiesanddepartments/computing/computingcourses http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/computing/teaching/ug/mengcompse

Cambridge: http://www.study.cam.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/compsci/

Oxford: http://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate_courses/courses/computer_science/computer_science_.html

I assume they teach mathematics, because it's useful for software engineers.