Progressive on social issues, regressive/conservative on a lot of economic issues. Neoliberalism is back 19th century style.

They will just repeat what Trump said with a shit-eating grin. There is no original thought going on there.

I guess it boils down to what you consider worst. Gangs, or a tyrannical government who disappear people without due process. It is like releasing killer monkeys to take care of your radioactive crocodile problem.

“Moral enough”, let’s not pretend they’re not thirsting for their own genocide, just read their catchphrase “God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam”".

Two wrongs does not make a right.

Les américains sont particulièrement souriant et courtois je dirais. Les gens n’aiment surtout pas leurs politiques, mais ils sont de bon touristes. Il y a quelques nationalités qui me viennent en tête qui sont carément détestés partout ou ils vont. Je ne pense pas qu’on est à ce point la pour les francais et les américains.

Je dirais que ce sont les parisiens qui ont mauvaise réputation, du moins par ici ils sont un peu mal vus. Je sais pas à quel point la distinction est universelle.

Selon les anglais:

• Protéger le français c’est de la xénophobie.

• Si la culture francophone ne survie pas de ses propres mérites (e.g: sans loi), elle ne mérite pas d’être préservée.

• Parler en anglais partout, au travaille, en publique, dès qu’il y a un anglo à porté ce n’est pas suffisant. Faudrait qu’absolument tous les services soient disponibles en anglais. Parce ce que…

• C’est innaceptable pour un anglophone qu’un petit bout de terre sur le continent ne respecte pas leur privilège. Les francophones qu’ils n’ont nul part d’autre à aller qu’ils aillent chier, on va quand même pas apprendre à parler deux langues.

Si le Québec se fait assimiler, c’est finis pour toujours le Français en Amérique. Mais c’est étrangement compliqué pour les anglais de comprendre la situation un peu unique du Québec, étant encerclé par littéralement une seule langue. Mais après, quand je vois comment ils traitent n’importe qui d’autre ne parlant pas anglais, je comprend que ce n’est pas unique à comment ils traitent le Québec.

Désolé pour les fautes, ça fait des années que ma vie est an anglais ici. La dernière fois ou j’ai pu parler et écrire en français au travaille c’était en 2020 avant qu’un employé anglophone rejoigne mon équipe. Speak white!

I don’t think he’s a lawyer.

Yep! It is kind of funny too because petty insults is all they have, but they seem extremely sensible to them themselves. Trump has a nickname for virtually everyone, and they think it’s the best thing ever, but point out that he’s an insecure man wearing ungodly amount of makeup and they immediately get weirdly offended by it. “OrAnGe MaN bAd”. The funny thing is, as Trump would say, there is a lot of subject matter with his overall presentation, ironically.

Ultimately they have to decide if he can hold an office, I’d argue this supercede any technicality about the election itself. At worst I guess this could be decided after he won, but this would break the country.

I also think so. You can usually tell who is close to your own level, but anything too far off andthe signals for what is considered smart or dumb tend to blend together.

The one trait which usually don’t lie is the person ability to learn. Fast learners and autodidacts are almost always smart, and people who are slow to learn are almost always left of the curve. Other signals you mentioned are deeply rooted in culture and can reqlly give the wrong impression.

Removing bias from IQ tests is one hell of a challenge, but if we put that aside and only analyse IQ results from people from similar backgrounds, it definitely measure something, and it usually gives accurate results. Meaning your score would not change much by taking the test again.

IQ score correlate with someone general ability in pattern recognition, languages, logic, bias check and etc. It also correlate with grades, salary, lifespan. So, is that intelligence? I don’t know, but it is something.

I’d argue given enough time and effort almost anyone can become a domain expert in specific things and do incredible stuff. What distinguishes smart people from simpler folks usually boils down to them having a very easy time processing new stuff, which includes the ability to filter noise and fact check.

I don’t like the term “stupid”, but there hasn’t been a whole lot of evidence supporting the idea that human intelligence is compartimented. Humans with high IQs tend to outperform in average at most of what they try. Low IQ probably means you will work harder and have to specialize to achieve the same degree of competency. This just my hot take, I’ve fallen into this rabbit hole before and read a lot on the origin of IQs tests. In the end, intelligence alone does not determine a person’s worth anyway.

IQ tests were first developped because it seemed obvious not all students performed equally. On average a student that is good in a given discipline will also tend to do well in other unrelated disciplines. On average is the keyword here, outliers exist.

I think gifted students can easily tell what side of the curve they’re on, even though they might not want to acknowledge it. It is not even avout the grades, because gifted students also often learn early on that they can get away by doing the minimum amount of work and still get passing grades. So they’re not necessarily top of classes.

Gifted students get told they’re fast learner all the time, and they notice how everyone else seem to be progressing in slow motion. They know.

I think it gets harder to self-evaluate the closer you are to the average, since most of your peers will be more or less just as intelligent as you. Then, the dullest you are, and the less you can identify competense and the more likely you are to be over-confident.

I think in the end, most people will end up believing they’re above average because we tend to notice dumb people a lot. Ironically it is probably students who are just slightly above average who will have the most self-doubts, because they feel different from their peers, yet they can probably tell more gifted students are around.

Source: 50% my ass, 50% being surrounded by incredibly smart people who shared their personal experiences with me.

I knew someone like this, his entire universe was a collection of random lies, and he’d always adapt the story for maximum impact with different audiences. He got a high from it. He lived for that feeling of manipulating people. So unfortunately in my experience, even though he was miserable without the lies, sewing the web of lies was a high point in his life. Normal people would feel sick to their stomachs lying so much, but psychos lack this reaction.

You’re right. To add onto that it was Ivana who said he kept this book near his bed, it always been pretty credible.

I get that a lot when I put butter on my pizza crust, I mean it is bread?

Whatever social economic model which can funnel power and authority to the very top is bond to ruin us. Humans are too greedy to sit at the top of such hierarchies.

There is a nuance though, because a language simply being interpreted does not mean it is being used as a scripting language. Take for example Java and C#, those languages are interpreted by default which allow you to ship platform-agnostic binaries and a bunch of other neat features. C# can be used as a scripting language, whenever it is interpreted, but it does not have too. It is an important nuance and this is why you can’t just replace the term “scripting language” entirely. You can also compile C# directly into machine code, skipping the interpreter entirely. Technically, there is nothing stopping you from writing an application that use C# as a scripting language even without the interpreter, since you can compile c# to machine code and simply dynamically load the library at runtime (kind of like Unity does). I guess you could call those “embedded languages”, and it would mean almost exactly the same thing, but then, aren’t we back to the same problem of some developers taking offence from that? I mean, it does imply that the language does not stand on its own without machine code just as well, which is true. This is one weird hill to have a bruised ego over for those developers you’ve met. Words have meaning and this one just happen to be a right fit given the description. I have a feeling from this whole exchange that you didn’t know what scripting languages were, considering how you replied to my first post. I worked in development for over a decade and I have never seen it be used with negative implications. I really just think you personally projected your own feeling onto a term you didn’t understand. No offence intended, it happens.

There are definitely people out there shitting on all sort of languages, and JS is a huge target, but those have been referred to as scripting language for as long as they existed. It stern from the fact those languages are embedded into existing applications, as opposed to being built into binaries. Nowadays you have hybrids like C# which can used as either a scripting language or to build native app (or in-betwee), so it is really just a matter of the context you’re using the language in. There is inherently no hidden meaning or elitism in the term. It is a very old term and I think you simply got the wrong impression from your internet experiences. It is how those languages are defined basically everywhere. Even some of those languages official definition from their own website self-define as scripting languages. There is no ambiguity here at all.