jwmgregory

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

people aren’t downvoting you emotionally. they just very much disagree with the notion of an individual owning intellectual property, and the idea that copyright somehow spurs innovation instead of snuffing it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

at the time, they honestly did.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

you guys are fucking crazy. ukrainian government knows there’s a very tangible and real possibility of defeat, or at the least concessions to russia during negotiations. do you really think it is in their best interests to let the kremlin make claims about ukrainian acts of terror during that stage?? like it or not, the world isnt some fucking equitable, fair fairy tale. russia has significantly more bargaining power here. they can afford ukraine making such claims, that doesn’t matter. on the flip side, ukraine cannot.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

not to double reply to you but the issue here isn’t training versus not training for the test; the issue is that psychiatrist and psychologist can’t rotely sort out what influences “training” and other activities actually had on the results of the test versus what a theoretical, “pure” test result would’ve been. frankly i’d imagine different psychologist in different context would want to control for this in a variety of ways. maybe in one experiment, telling the population not to train is the best way to get at the data you want. but for the most part? no. absolutely not. the claim that telling people to not train or study for an IQ test somehow is a be all end all control for wanton influences & noise in IQ results is total bunk. think about this. what even qualifies as studying for an IQ test? is the teenage boy incidentally studying for his ACT’s at the same time as a population IQ test, who consequently scored higher than the median average for his age range, cheating or invalid in his results? most people and psychology studies would likely say no, not really. this demonstrates some of the fundamental flaws in IQ and g-factor that psychologists have to recognize while working with them. there’s truly no real way to sort out what is “cheating/invalidating” on an IQ test versus what data is potentially legitimate. because objectively speaking, what IQ measures is incredibly subjective. on top of all that, either way, it’s impossible and impractical to try and control for every single thing people do in their daily lives.

EDIT: stray “a” removed

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

the video annoys you because you’re not the target audience. you clearly already see validity in IQ as a metric and have use cases for it. most STEM people (veritasium’s audience writ large) do not traditionally view IQ favorably, and at worst consider it a worthless bunk metric. the video isn’t intended to say “hey! here’s how psychiatrist and psychologist view and use IQ in statistical analysis and their work (bc remember, STEM people know about this legitimate use in these fields, they just typically discount or look down upon it due to IQ’s reputation),” it’s intended to say “hey! i know you don’t think IQ is real/valid, but here is a video essay exploring the concept through a very STEM lense.” of course he talks about taking the test and studying for it. he talks about taking the test blind too. he’s a fucking engineer, physicist, and doctor. the exact kind of person to recognize what tools like IQ metrics actually are, and that there is no single one way to measure, use, or quantify this data that’s more “correct” than others, when divorced from context. veritasium demonstrated a very thorough understanding of the actual concepts and theoretical principles that underlie IQ, and I thought his video was a very fresh perspective. it certainly demonstrated a mastery of the concept that i believe is absent from someone who might hold the opinions you’re espousing here (genuinely don’t mean to come off as rude here sorry for having autism energy)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

this is exactly what i’m describing, sorry hazy memory.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

this works to disable gestures but doesn’t seem to work like apollo where the screen space for navigation gestures is much wider than with the gestures

 

Idk if i’m a unique apollo user in this regard, but on apollo you were able to set gestures to the page transitions (what is currently the very edge left or right swipe in voyager with no option to change), and when using apollo i would set all left or right gestures to the page change, making the app work so that any left or right swipe would function as a back/forward swipe and go to the next/previous page in the queue. i much prefer this functionality to the various gesture options in apollo and voyager and would love if voyager could eventually support this functionality as well.

EDIT: actually on voyager it seems there’s only right back swipe functionality, no left forward swipe at all?? maybe i’m tripping. if this is the case tho, to me that would seem to indicate voyager is entirely missing the revolving virtual queue function that apollo let you navigate with left and right swipes

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

yeah i mean idk i have no idea lmao. i just googled slot light and saw lights that looked vaguely similar to some local theatres i’ve seen around my country

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

i’m pretty sure he’s referring to those physical lights embedded below/around the projector screen in some theatres that’re sometimes left still on, but very dimmed. i’m not a cam guy but i’d imagine if you do watch cams it’d be kind of annoying the whole entire time to have them on screen.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thanks you’re awesome!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Would it be possible to modify the sorting feature so that it isn’t universal? In Apollo, unless I’m misremembering, I’m fairly certain the sorting would default back to a set sorting function, usually Hot or whatever the equivalent was. It might’ve been a setting called default sorting method, again my memory is hazy and I can’t exactly go check. I digress. This was convenient bc oftentimes when someone sorts by Top, Active, or Controversial it is only for the given instance they’re currently viewing, and they intend on viewing a specific sorting method generally while otherwise browsing. It would be nice as at least an option, if possible to implement easily.

view more: next ›