What do you think the average IQ of this forum is?

[wraper]

if anything i tend to watch the BBC..

It basically the same as CNN, just UK style and directly state sponsored. No much difference.

[Elasia]

if anything i tend to watch the BBC..

It basically the same as CNN, just UK style and directly state sponsored. No much difference.

Think so? Other than being for the crown their world news is head and shoulders over what we normally get... just look at stuff like the olympics... we get idiot commentators and a billion commercial cuts and time lags.  Ok I will fully admit i am also jaded for the BBC because of shows like Doctor Who.

[coppice]

if anything i tend to watch the BBC..

It basically the same as CNN, just UK style and directly state sponsored. No much difference.

Think so? Other than being for the crown their world news is head and shoulders over what we normally get... just look at stuff like the olympics... we get idiot commentators and a billion commercial cuts and time lags.  Ok I will fully admit i am also jaded for the BBC because of shows like Doctor Who.

I would agree that the BBC news is head and shoulders above any news coverage I've seen in the US. However, its still really really bad. The few times the BBC covered something I was closely aware of in real life, they made no attempt to get even close to accurate reporting. They just went for the most sensational slant on the material they could access with minimal effort.

[Elasia]

I would agree that the BBC news is head and shoulders above any news coverage I've seen in the US. However, its still really really bad. The few times the BBC covered something I was closely aware of in real life, they made no attempt to get even close to accurate reporting. They just went for the most sensational slant on the material they could access with minimal effort.

Anything decent out there currently then? Oz maybe to the rescue?

[coppice]

Trying to pretend people are not born smart and dumb is as foolish as pretending they are not born short and tall.

Actually, everyone is born short. A six-foot baby would kill the mother before birth.

People are born programmed for their final adult height with surprising predictability, unless some major medical event or lack of resources limits their development. People selecting for things like sports training and ballet schools have been accurately predicting the adult height of candidates for a long time. You can give a short child human growth hormone, and see a spurt in their growth. However, by the time their growth has completed they are at roughly the height expected from their development before the medication.

So, we are born to be short or tall, although misfortune can lead to a shortfall in growth.

[Cerebus]

I would agree that the BBC news is head and shoulders above any news coverage I've seen in the US. However, its still really really bad. The few times the BBC covered something I was closely aware of in real life, they made no attempt to get even close to accurate reporting. They just went for the most sensational slant on the material they could access with minimal effort.

That's not the BBC, that's news journalism from anybody, in any medium, anywhere in the world (anywhere where they are free to not read out a script from the ministry of propaganda). There are some exceptions, but they are few and far between. Specialist news reporting (e.g. New Scientist) can be better quality, but is not necessarily so and still leaves much to be desired.

Weirdly I've found the BBC World Service coverage is far better than the domestic BBC coverage and, while not perfect, is better than most news reporting.

[Elasia]

Weirdly I've found the BBC World Service coverage is far better than the domestic BBC coverage and, while not perfect, is better than most news reporting.

Yeah the world service is what I was talking about earlier

[Beamin]

I would have guessed 120, but, having skimmed through this thread I'll knock 10 points off.

You should watch some of Jordan Peterson's lectures to understand how well IQ is understood and measured and how effective a predictor it is of various life outcomes.

Trying to pretend people are not born smart and dumb is as foolish as pretending they are not born short and tall.

Within 90 seconds of meeting someone and talking to them I can tell what range someone is in by about 10-15 points. I tested this one time where I was on business trip where everyone in the training class was given a 50 question IQ test. I guessed every ones IQ then saw their test results. The class was 50% above average lowest person was a 95. So calibrating yourself is important. I use this in everyday life to see how much responsibility I should give that person and whether I should rely on what they are telling me.

You can also tell from the way they walk. If they are pigeon toed that most always indicates they are low like <85. You can also tell if they are gay. MOST of the time not always. I knew a kid in high school that was pigeon toed that wasn't dumb but had other mental issues. I have also known a girl that had a ghetto accent that had an IQ of 140. You could tell because her misuse of words was always consistent; she had not been taught correctly, where as others have to guess at which verbiage to use. I also met a blind lady that threw me off because she seemed so dumb but her IQ wasn't low. She displayed a learned helplessness to get attention and thought saying "What? I don't get it" was cute. 

[Beamin]

I often read the political comments on you tube and wonder how those people remember to breathe. They will contradict themselves in the same statement And use Capital letters In the middle of sentences. Best part is they call YOU stupid or assume the person is an American voter when some have not even been to America.

Capital letters in the middle of sentences!!!  Where have I seen that recently?  A sure sign of an idiot, no doubt. Then there is using the same emoticon in triplicate and reading political comments on Youtube.

FYI. Intelligence is defined in the OED as "The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills." 

If there is one thing I have observed about intelligent people, it is that they don't go around trying to convince others of their intelligence.

But I'm like a smart person. Bigly most stable genius.  Believe me the irony of this crossed my mind with the full possibility of looking like the "idiots" I was talking about. Never said I wasn't below 100 oh wait yes I did. Maybe if I keep telling people I'm really smart they will believe me. You know what I admire about some of the low IQ people is they have no shame in asking simple questions. It shows they are willing to learn unlike some of their higher intelligence counter parts.  When someone tries to convince someone they are smart I picture the look on the president/prime minister/emperor  of japans face right after trump tried to shake hands with him and didn't understand how to act normal. It said "Oh boy! I can't believe people voted for this guy. They are in for a rough ride."

So yes when I made this thread I realized that I risked sounding dumb but that's ok. IQ is not the be all end all.

[TerraHertz]

Anything decent out there currently then? Oz maybe to the rescue?

Ha ha, you jest. Exactly the same monoculture media ownership here in Oz. Possibly worse. I have to physically leave the room sometimes when there's a TV on. Comparing MSM sludge-pourings against a background of alternate media sources, is really depressing. Especially when you guess a few days beforehand what spin line the MSM is going to take on something, then they go ahead and do it.

Speaking of mind control, has anyone seen this great new idea from Samsung?
  http://www.samsung.com/se/unspoilme/eng/

I don't know if it's real. The site just sits there with a loading icon, on my system.

Samsung has launched a website promising to wipe your favorite TV series from your memory so you can watch it again seemingly for the first time.

 The creepy concept, known as Unspoil me, was apparently launched in January and is available through the company's Swedish site.

 The technique was developed by certified hypnotists Ulf Sandström and Frederik Praesto, who narrates the video.

 The 23-minute procedure is a guided hypnosis which tells you to focus on the show you want to erase from your memory, as it shows a hypnotic pattern and walks you through a series of instructions  ...more...

Maybe it's a parody?
Or is Samsung, known for their 'smart TVs' that listen in to your room, now experimenting with hypnotic mind control via PC screen?

This will go exciting places, I'm sure.

Added:

I often read the political comments on you tube

Your advertised kink level is becoming quite awesome. Tell me more.

[Galenbo]

...even one with an intellectual skill at its core, and the average will still be around 100.

Further split up the group "with intellectual skill" in:
"intellectual skill based on mathematics" and
"intellectual skill based on hope and drama"
and you get a group with an average around 115, and one with an average around 85.

[Galenbo]

Political correctness...

My first year in US: this is a good place.
My second year in US: fuck Chinese communist government.
My third year in US: wait a minute.
My fourth year in US: I'm moving back to China.

there's another possible reason.

The first year you were relatively poor, uneducated, and not working.
Western "social corrected" world is a very good place for people in that situation.

Smart Educated Working people are better off in de-facto kapitalist "old-communist" areas.

[Galenbo]

...  I guessed every ones IQ then saw their test results. ... I use this in everyday life to see how much responsibility I should give that person and whether I should rely on what they are telling me...

Many managers do the same. People with an high IQ, or higher than themselves, do not receive any power and responsibility.

[Galenbo]

Exactly. This is why many engineers, researchers and businessmen move back to China.
But we do have an eye on the communist government, and we usually set up off shore accounts and a safe deposit plus a way to transfer income to the free West before we leave the West.
In China we say a smart rabbit has three holes.

I experience a situation that is worse than what I read/saw/felt in China.
Belgium has a multi-head-dragon 1-party pro-monarchy system, and the 50-percentile of the population is fed propaganda to "believe" in freedom/free choice. They don't even turn their head away but loudly repeat what they are fed.

Unfortunately, for me there is no way to go "back" to somewhere else, but seriously thinking about moving to a place that has 1/3 of the GDP, and 1/3 of the political correctness.

[coppice]

Weirdly I've found the BBC World Service coverage is far better than the domestic BBC coverage and, while not perfect, is better than most news reporting.

Yeah the world service is what I was talking about earlier

The BBC World Service rides on the back of the rest of the BBC News system. Its still relies on the same lazy journalism, that's indifferent to accuracy and thoroughness.

[trys]

Actually, thinking about this topic, it begs the question: What does it matter?

It's what you do with *anything* you have for the good of others that matters. In my humble opinion. At the end of the day. Otherwise, what is the point?

Trys
(I'll crawl under my rock)

[Halcyon]

[Within 90 seconds of meeting someone and talking to them I can tell what range someone is in by about 10-15 points. I tested this one time where I was on business trip where everyone in the training class was given a 50 question IQ test. I guessed every ones IQ then saw their test results. The class was 50% above average lowest person was a 95. So calibrating yourself is important. I use this in everyday life to see how much responsibility I should give that person and whether I should rely on what they are telling me.

You can also tell from the way they walk. If they are pigeon toed that most always indicates they are low like <85. You can also tell if they are gay. MOST of the time not always. I knew a kid in high school that was pigeon toed that wasn't dumb but had other mental issues. I have also known a girl that had a ghetto accent that had an IQ of 140. You could tell because her misuse of words was always consistent; she had not been taught correctly, where as others have to guess at which verbiage to use. I also met a blind lady that threw me off because she seemed so dumb but her IQ wasn't low. She displayed a learned helplessness to get attention and thought saying "What? I don't get it" was cute.

You just have to be very careful and target your assessments depending on where people are from and what industry they work in (i.e.: Collect as much information about them before you meet). For example, I work in an environment full of Government employees, most with Police or Military backgrounds and hold Masters degrees (some have a Doctorate). Without knowing those details, it would be nearly impossible to assess their intelligence or knowledge level because most of the time, they only reveal the bare minimum and a lot of things are kept secret. It would be really easy to make a false assessment and ultimately make yourself look foolish. I think if you met them in the street and didn't know them, you would just think they are some kind of middle-grade IT professional.

[coppice]

Actually, thinking about this topic, it begs the question: What does it matter?

It's what you do with *anything* you have for the good of others that matters. In my humble opinion. At the end of the day. Otherwise, what is the point?

Trys
(I'll crawl under my rock)

IQ is only one component of an effective person, but components do matter.

[brucehoult]

Actually, thinking about this topic, it begs the question: What does it matter?

Oh dear, oh dear. That's -40 IQ points for misuse of "to beg the question".

It's what you do with *anything* you have for the good of others that matters. In my humble opinion.

OK, I'll give you +10 IQ points for H = humble not honest.

[coppice]

You just have to be very careful and target your assessments depending on where people are from and what industry they work in (i.e.: Collect as much information about them before you meet). For example, I work in an environment full of Government employees, most with Police or Military backgrounds and hold Masters degrees (some have a Doctorate). Without knowing those details, it would be nearly impossible to assess their intelligence or knowledge level because most of the time, they only reveal the bare minimum and a lot of things are kept secret. It would be really easy to make a false assessment and ultimately make yourself look foolish. I think if you met them in the street and didn't know them, you would just think they are some kind of middle-grade IT professional.

There are some rather sad statistics about the correlation between interview performance and job performance. Current studies make it look so bad that some think job interviews might disappear, perhaps being legally banned as useful for nothing more than allowing the interviewer to apply their prejudices. I find this very odd. In real life a lot of people can be quickly seen as far better or far worse than you might have expected from anything you could see before their interview. Most people who come across well enough in front of competent interviewers to be hired seem to perform somewhat close to expectations. Competent is the key word, here. Some people seem to consistently hire the worst of the candidates, but surely at least some well run studies should have tried to separate "do interviews work?" from "are there good and bad interviews/interviewers"?

[Halcyon]

You just have to be very careful and target your assessments depending on where people are from and what industry they work in (i.e.: Collect as much information about them before you meet). For example, I work in an environment full of Government employees, most with Police or Military backgrounds and hold Masters degrees (some have a Doctorate). Without knowing those details, it would be nearly impossible to assess their intelligence or knowledge level because most of the time, they only reveal the bare minimum and a lot of things are kept secret. It would be really easy to make a false assessment and ultimately make yourself look foolish. I think if you met them in the street and didn't know them, you would just think they are some kind of middle-grade IT professional.

There are some rather sad statistics about the correlation between interview performance and job performance. Current studies make it look so bad that some think job interviews might disappear, perhaps being legally banned as useful for nothing more than allowing the interviewer to apply their prejudices. I find this very odd. In real life a lot of people can be quickly seen as far better or far worse than you might have expected from anything you could see before their interview. Most people who come across well enough in front of competent interviewers to be hired seem to perform somewhat close to expectations. Competent is the key word, here. Some people seem to consistently hire the worst of the candidates, but surely at least some well run studies should have tried to separate "do interviews work?" from "are there good and bad interviews/interviewers"?

As with everything, I don't think there is a "one size fits all" approach. In my experience on interview panels (both as an interviewer and as a candidate), the biggest issue is with those on the panel itself. It's common to find people who don't know how to conduct an interview, don't understand the position and the various requirements or ask completely irrelevant questions which don't have "right or wrong" responses.

If you're interviewing for a technical role, ask about the candidates prior experience, qualification and specific technical questions. An interviewer shouldn't be asking meaningless questions like "If you were an animal, what animal would you be and why?", they not only make the interviewer appear inexperienced, but the question (and any response) is completely irrelevant, unless you're interviewing for an acting role dressed up in an animal costume.

The last interview I sat in years ago was great. The questions were mostly all technical before the discussion moved onto my personnel record. That was it. Straight to the point and relevant.

[coppice]

... An interviewer shouldn't be asking meaningless questions like "If you were an animal, what animal would you be and why?", they not only make the interviewer appear inexperienced, but the question (and any response) is completely irrelevant, unless you're interviewing for an acting role dressed up in an animal costume.

My stock answer to such a question is "Although I generally don't think anthropomorphism is helpful in understanding animal behavior I would choose Badger from Kenneth Grahame's book "The Wind in the Willows". I thought him to be wise and kind."

So, you don't want to be a homo sapien?

[NivagSwerdna]

If you're interviewing for a technical role, ask about the candidates prior experience, qualification and specific technical questions.

I've been a consultant on and off for decades so done rather a lot of interviews with rather a lot of organisations but what never ceases to amaze me is that for most of those when applying for a software role I have never been asked to actually write a program.  Just Bizarre.
The interviews I remember as satisfying always involved an actual computer and an actual problem but they were few and far between. (There have been a couple that used Codility or Hackerrank etc... not sure about those... Codility is really just out to trick you and once you know their game it is fine but it's a brutal test for the un-initiated.)