I was walking up to my building to go into work. I started coughing really hard. I ended up with a lot of phlegm in the back of my throat. I turned left to spit it out onto the grass. Just as this little 5 foot nothing woman was passing me on the left. I jumped back a little bit and swallowed the phlegm.

She asked, "Did I startle you?"

"No, I nearly spit in your face."

"OH MY GOD, I don't know how I would have reacted to that."

" I think you would likely have had to call me an ambulance."
 
So...what the heck is going down at Texas Tech today?


Some people are guessing an electrical fire, others are guessing the birth of a new Disney villain.

--Patrick
 
:notes:

We’re the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys.

It’s our last name,
We were born with them,
We did not choose them,
We won’t shove them,
We will not pick them,
Thank you, Danhausen,
Who were we fooling,
No double dealing,
We are not swearing,
So many Asses,
One family tree,
We can prove it with a 23andMe.

We’re the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys.

We’re not swearing,
Our grandpa changed it at Ellis Island,
It used to be Hindquarters,
Now, we’re just Ass Boys,
We are the Ass Boys,
We’re not your boy toys,
One day we’ll be Ass Men,
Still won’t be swearing,
Our name is Ass,
We are set free,
There’s enough to go around for you, and you, and me.

We’re the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys.

It’s our last name.

It’s our last name,
You can't swear when you’re on TV,
It’s a real life name,
Technically, it’s not swearing because,
We’re the Ass Boys.

We’re the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys,
We’re the Ass Boys,
Billy Ass and the Ass Boys.

It’s their last name!


:notes:
 
Last edited:
Welp
echoecho.png

I don't use any Alexa devices, but I am interpreting this one of two ways:
  1. Aggregate surveillance - "We literally don't listen to what you say. Everything is anonymized. BUT...we are going to aggregate what devices hear across specific neighborhoods/cities to get an (anonymous, natch) idea of the most common topics of conversation in a particular area, possibly linked to time of day, weather, or whatever our data miners can think up. Also maybe more attention to some specific key words but don't worry that's not important right now."
  2. Language training - "Our natural language models are going to be so AMAZONGLY natural once they've been trained on the finest utterances of millions of uncompensated volunteers."
--Patrick
 
It's the phones. Its so obviously the phones. All of these "people are dumber/more anxious/less social" are the phones. I'm not going to pretend I'm a special special exception because I'm not. I'm just an addict and its really obvious.
 
Now I want a reaction for WELL DUUUUUHHHHH...

I'm not sure it's "people are less intelligent" so much as it is "people no longer care about/seem motivated to uncover/are curious about the underlying cause(s) for anything ever." ...which I admit has the same end result that people end up less intelligent, buuuut whatever I'm just proving my point aren't I.

--Patrick
 
It looks like the article makes a point of specifying that it's talking about decreases in specific, measurable skillsets - attention span, reading by quantity, basic numeracy - that would pretty transparently be impacted by the advent and increasing use of smartphones, and not in actual human intellect which would seem a lot more alarming if it were decreasing in a measurable way. It's also focused on studies targeting teenagers, who were presumably the most impacted by covid and who also don't have any experience of a world without a handheld computer to do all their math for them.

Or, in other words, the title is alarmist clickbait that only tangentially relates to the meat of the article, but you need to have the attention span and ability to engage intelligently with information to recognize that, skills which the article says are on the decline.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
It looks like the article makes a point of specifying that it's talking about decreases in specific, measurable skillsets - attention span, reading by quantity, basic numeracy - that would pretty transparently be impacted by the advent and increasing use of smartphones, and not in actual human intellect which would seem a lot more alarming if it were decreasing in a measurable way. It's also focused on studies targeting teenagers, who were presumably the most impacted by covid and who also don't have any experience of a world without a handheld computer to do all their math for them.

Or, in other words, the title is alarmist clickbait that only tangentially relates to the meat of the article, but you need to have the attention span and ability to engage intelligently with information to recognize that, skills which the article says are on the decline.
The article does say the trend started prior to COVID, and it does draw the distinction between intelligence vs intellect.

FTA:

Though there has been a demonstrably steep decline in cognitive skills since the COVID-19 pandemic due to the educational disruption it presented, these trends have been in evidence since at least the mid-2010s, suggesting that whatever is going on runs much deeper and has lasted far longer than the pandemic.
...
There isn't any reason to suggest that human intellect has been harmed, the publication counters — but in "both potential and execution," our intelligence is definitely on the downturn.
I remember that even when I got a basic cellular phone that could remember phone numbers for me, my ability to remember phone numbers went from "I can reliably recall about 20 numbers at will" to "I can barely remember my own phone number."
 
I remember that even when I got a basic cellular phone that could remember phone numbers for me, my ability to remember phone numbers went from "I can reliably recall about 20 numbers at will" to "I can barely remember my own phone number."
My goto example is that I know what my best friend’s parents’ landline number 20 years ago was, but not his number today.
 
The article does say the trend started prior to COVID, and it does draw the distinction between intelligence vs intellect.

FTA:

I remember that even when I got a basic cellular phone that could remember phone numbers for me, my ability to remember phone numbers went from "I can reliably recall about 20 numbers at will" to "I can barely remember my own phone number."
I don't remember anyone's phone number today. But when I moved back to TX from VA, I could easily remember my old TDL #, and I remember my old 7-digit phone number from when I was growing up. I just don't think about some things enough for them to stick in long term memory like I used to have to. If you aren't continually having to refresh your memory of something, those neural pathways don't get reinforced and they just don't stick around.

It's something I've been noticing for *years*. When I was young, convenience store clerks had to learn to make change by doing math. Now, nobody has to know how to do basic math, and because the skill isn't reinforced through repetition, few people know how to do it these days. It just kills me when something costs (for example) $x.83 and I give the guy some bills and they don't immediately know the change is 17 cents. I've long since given up on doing the whole "here's a 20 and a few coins so I can get whole bills back" thing because it always causes such a delay at the drive-through
 
Last edited:
The article does say the trend started prior to COVID, and it does draw the distinction between intelligence vs intellect.
It also uses data about American adults to support conclusions from the research that exclusively evaluated the skills of teenagers, and offers up studies of 15- to 18-year-olds to support its assertion that the impacts it's talking about are "across age groups." There's some interesting information and some citations, but the article as a whole is pretty unfocused and largely divorced from the claim the title makes. The concluding sentence in particular reads as either very unclear - the terms they use are not at all clearly defined - or as contradicting itself.

All of which is to say that I'm taking anything that isn't directly from a study it's referencing with a decent handful of salt.
 
Where's that "impossible" 8th grade exam from way back? Ah, here we go:
--Patrick
 
Where's that "impossible" 8th grade exam from way back? Ah, here we go:
--Patrick
I feel like most people would fail this test because they haven't memorized the knowledge required for it, and aren't able to regurgitate it onto the test paper.

For example, "Give nine rules for the use of Capital Letters." I'd wager the vast majority of us here are capable of using capitalization correctly, we just haven't memorized the nine specific rules where capitalization should be used.

(Also I feel like "Capital Letters" shouldn't have been capitalized there.)
 
The first Simon-Binet scales translated from French by Goddard in 1911, I believe, were applied with virtually no changes. The resulting failures on the test by thousands of children due to cultural and knowledge expectations led to panic, bolstered rising xenophobia, and led to justifications for eugenics in U.S. mental institutions. And that was the best intelligence test we had up to that point.
 
Top