Topic: Why do most Bitcoiners seem intelligent? - page 2. (Read 10801 times)

I think we are moving more mundane things out of our brains and into devices that can handle these things for us, and are freeing up our brains for more advanced things. Well, some of us are.

What makes it "hard" is the average person can't figure out how to swipe a credit card and use a pin keypad. The can't remember passwords, or even phone numbers anymore because they store them all in their iphones.

The entire planet is going the way of idiocracy.

Agreed, I know a lot of people with "Masters" and "Doctorate" who have their nose so high, thinking they are better than everyone else in the office, meanwhile they are doing the same things I am, getting paid the same wage, thinking they deserve more because they went the extra mile in education. The kicker is that sometimes their higher education doesn't translate into actionable or useful skills at the workplace.

Mind you, not all are like this, I know quite a few that are motivated and contributes a lot to the task at hand at the office...but one thing in common is that they all have huge "student loan debts", up in the $100K area. Ouch.

Your prize is 1000 Paradimes!   

The idea behind Paradime (the altcoin for dimwits) was to create a clone of Primecoin, but with block rewards going to miners who are the first to discover new even numbers that are multiples of 10. 

Unfortunately Paradime is not traded on any exchange.   The code was written by people who strenuously believe IQ has no bearing on aptitude or ability, so it's completely broken.

If you are a BASIC guru, perhaps you can submit some bug fixes and get it going. 

Ha Ha , this is funny. 

Then it would follow that the Dunning-Kruger effect claim is a synthetic proposition as well.

I think most Bitcoiners or crypto currency enthusiast in general understand at some level the current economic situation and geopolitical sate of the world. 

We understand that America cannot print money forever.
We understand history repeats itself (Nazi Germany printed money, like crazy before WWII... lead to hyper inflation).
We understand that currency wars lead to trade wars, which leads to real wars (history proves this)
We understand that GOLD is great store of value, but you cannot carry gold around with you (though some gold is necessary in a portfolio...5%)
We understand that the printed money are used to fund clandestine wars all over the world.

Most importantly that the world cannot and should not keep the current monetary system which has been around since after the times of Egypt.  Central Banking controlled world by the elites where most governments around the world are their puppets doing their bidding.  Media is used to make citizens think, act and spend a certain way.

Do you have student loans?
Do you have car loans?
Do you have credit card debts?
Do you have a huge mortgage?

Understand , You are in debt by design.

People are the workers in the system kept indebted,  paying taxes and banking fees funneling the money up the chain to the few that just keeps getting richer. 

We understand that a new and more egalitarian /  free money system must take over and at least give some power to the people, instead of the governments and elites that control over 80% of the world's wealth.

If you can spare a few hours watch this video analysis about Control System and "The Matrix" world we live in :

http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1118/the-matrix-trilogy-decoded-by-mark-passio-the-system-we-live-in/

The above is pretty much all I can think of right now.  I'm sure the hoards of smart people on this forum can add more points.

Peace out.

CryptoCoinMKT

The bitcoin community seems very polarized to me. It is exacerbated by the fact that to really understand bitcoin, one needs to have both the ability to grasp the technical side of the software/protocol and various economic mechanisms.

On one hand you have people capable of thinking outside of the box, who 1/ realize that the world is not immutable 2/ can attempt to imagine how things could be if they were different from what they are now.

On the other hand you have gullible idiots who believe in instant riches, conspirations and magics and basically can't think for themselves but are very eager to follow any guru they will find.

Usually the "smart" people in the community are computer engineers and they sometimes have and an understanding of the economy that is too simplistic. There is not enough "economists" in the community but the main reason is that "economic science" not being a science, most economists are stupid and narrow minded and are therefore constantly victim of cognitive dissonance through their life. So they would very quickly reject bitcoin without giving it much thought. Therefore it's among traders and entrepreneurs (whome I call the real economists) that you will find many of the people constituting the other half of the "smart" people.

I would argue that there are very few human beings who aren't intelligent; our species is the very definition of intelligence, the reason why the word, let alone the concept, exists at all.  It depends on how a person acts; even people who believe in completely irrational things can appear highly intelligent; they can form sentences just fine and explain clearly their beliefs, whatever they may be.  The effect seen when examining people on this forum is that they generally favor logic and reason, complete their ideas using their language properly, and have an interest in ideas that other people don't prefer to think about; I believe this is directly influenced by Bitcoin and what it is, that draws so many of the same type of personalities.  A test was done earlier that showed this forum was dominated by INTx personalities, who are known to be rational and logical, and love abstract concepts like philosophy and science.  Perhaps it is these traits that make them appear more intelligent than others, but this does not imply that their minds are literally bigger or faster; the personality merely holds knowledge in a very high regard.  So, the presentation of these people are generally as I've described; a desire to be clear and concise with one's language, so they may express their ideas on abstract concepts (like Bitcoin) in a way others would understand.

Of course, everyone has different interests, and they're all intelligent, even if their beliefs are irrational (like racists, for example.  And scientologists/mormons.)  Bitcoin just attracts a certain type of person.  Are they more intelligent?  I don't believe we can measure the ability of a person to think based on their interests, personality or presentation; I believe it is already obvious that a person can think, and what it is they think about is what they naturally choose to think on, and how often.  My mind works in no different fashion than any other; what differs is what I value, and though some people may value morals, or wealth, or relationships, I value knowing and understanding.

So naturally, that would lead to an increase of general knowledge.  But if we're measuring intelligence on how much we know, People magazine would be the most stimulating literature in the world.

I has an IQ of 82 can I join yer club?

I always got shit grades in school, except that I was also in a bad financial situation and had to work up until 12AM as a waiter despite the fact that it was illegal to employ me that late as a teenager, I was also almost always tired in school and rumors were running around that I was using drugs, one of the teachers even told my friends not to hang out with me because he was so convinced, all the "geeks" that studied well in those days are lacking aspirations nowadays and generally behave like sacks of shit getting below-average pay and spending their free time being backstabbing lazy couch potato stoners, people that are like minded and go through life like sheeple taking advice from teachers/parents/friends go nowhere in life.

I  ended up getting an awesome job with above-average pay, getting in shape, smashing sloots and generally having a pretty sweet life. High school grades != (Intelligence/success in life), Uni grades !=(Intelligence/success in life)

Well, how much would you have to support or like bitcoin to be considered on the side of bitcoin?
Conversely, how much do you have to dislike bitcoin to be considered a detractor?
What about the people without strong opinions? People who like bitcoin but not fanatically? Or people who don't like digital money but still use it because its there? Are they true supporters and haters?

I don't think there is a hard division between people who like bitcoin and people who are against. It's a synthetic proposition.

I felt the same way during my university graduation. Everyone was all excited about having such a great accomplishment, and patting themselves for overcoming great difficulties, while I felt that there was nothing special about it. I just did what I was told to, one step at a time, and graduation was just another in a long series of steps. It's like, "anyone can do this, if they just went out and did it. What's the big deal?"
Master's level graduation was a bit different. They REALLY tax your brain and make you work in those classes.

Bitcoin is just the natural and rational evolution of money. Not surprising it would be firstly noticed by intelligent people

OK.  I totally believe you have a 160 IQ now.

Seriously, the smarter you are it seems the more bored people are in high school.  In my experience it seems those that have the best grades are the ones in the 120-130 range.   I was just barely above that so my grades were OK but not great.  I did not care that much.  I was shocked when I graduated with honors.  I was like, "How did I do that?"  I was not really trying to.   I felt a little guilty then.  I often think if I had only applied myself I guess I could have graduated at the top?  But I did not care that much really.  In fact, after taking one AP class I realized I was working harder for an "A" and it would be much easier to just take a normal class, not study at all and get an A or B.  I guess I was a little "lazy" too.

We have two very distinct groups here: people who like bitcoin and support it, and people who dislike bitcoin and think it's stupid. The group that is indifferent is irrelevant, since it simply doesn't participate. I don't see an issue with the 'no true scotsman' here.
Regarding Dunning-Kruger, I wasn't aware that there was a scale to it. From what I understand, it's just a concept where people who are dumb are convincing themselves that they are actually smarter than they truly are, and reject competing ideas from smarter people as stupid. If you didn't understand the issue I was talking about, let me rephrase it:

Bitcoiners, being involved with a digital currency in many different aspects, believe they understand economics, currencies, and finance. Bitcoin detractors, such as SA goons, believe that bitcoin is actually a stupid idea, and that bitcoiners who support it are suffering from a Dunning-Krueger effect, wherein the bitcoiners have convinced themselves that they are smart about finance and econ, when they actually aren't. In this case, bitcoiners are dumb Dunning-Kruger types, and the detractors that accuse them of such are the smart ones.

Conversely, bitcoin detractors, such as SA goods, believe they understand finance, currencies, and economics, and think that bitcoin is a stupid idea. Bitcoiners think that bitcoin is actually a good idea, and that bitcoin detractors are suffering from a Dunning-Kruger effect, wherein the SA goons only think they are smart about finance and econ, but actually aren't. In this case, bitcoin detractors are dumb Dunning-Kruger types (ironically), and bitcoiners that use bitcoin and understand the related finance and econ are the smart ones.

It's not a question of who is smart and who is dumb. It's an issue of bitcoin detractors, such as SA goons, accusing Bitcoiners of suffering from Dunning-Kruger effects, thinking they understand econ and  finance better, when, ironically, they themselves may be the ones suffering from those effects.


As for IQ, it sounds like some of you don't even know what IQ test questions are like. They don't test your knowledge (i.e. you don't need to know algebra, though I knew it since I was 10). You just need to show how well you can conceptualize problems, and how quickly you can process data. A good analogy would be:

A person with a high IQ is like a Quad-Core 3.5Ghz PC. A person with a low IQ is like a single code 1.5Ghz PC. One can process data much faster than the other. Knowledge and skills, on the other hand, is like OS and software. You can stick Windows on the 3.5Ghz PC, and a trimmed-down Linux on the 1.5Ghz PC, and in the end they will both run at about the same speed. The 1.5Ghz PC may even be more capable, depending on software you need to use. So, if you were to sit two people with the same set of skills in front of a logic or concept problem, both will be able to solve it, but the higher IQ one will solve it faster. If you give the problem to an experienced low-IQ person and an inexperienced high-IQ person, the low-IQ person will solve it faster, since the high-IQ person will have to figure it out from scratch. If you give the problem to low and high IQ people who have no prior experience at all, the low-IQ one might never be able to solve it. FYI, I am a lazy bastard, and spent the last two years of highschool getting shit grades and almost never doing homework or studying for exams, but I never got less than a B on tests, simply because I derived most of the exam problems from scratch or bits of memory, instead of studying and memorizing things like my classmates. Out of humility, I'd like to think that I'm not that special, and any one of my classmates could have done the same, but I somehow doubt that.

Why are you so bothered about what factors I would use to determine the value of someone's contributions?  As long as you are free to decide what factors you take into consideration, why does it matter what factors I take into consideration?


Not at all.  If someone with a low IQ told me that 2 + 2 = 4, then I would certainly agree with them.

This thread has been around long enough now to remove any concern that Bitcoiners might have above average intelligence.

Are you really going to judge people's contributions by their IQ, as opposed to what they say? That is very stupid. What if someone with a low IQ says something that is provably correct? Is it wrong just because their IQ is low?