Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | efilife's commentslogin

looks like it paid off

Eat goji berries, play tennis, and eat 10x the amount of daily recommended Vitamin C. I will live to be 100

Again, downvoted for being sane

But isn't this true? Asians are proven to have the highest IQ

I thought we were beyond this argument, no? There are so many things with all the implications here it's hard to know where to start.

You do realize that picking a certain concept "intelligence", defining it to include certain characteristics, tying it to a certain notion of "fitness", defining "Asian", and finally, tying "asian" to "intelligence", are all matters of definition, choice, and perception and nothing fundamental about reality, right?


No.

Race isn't biological, it's a social and political construct. The social and political construct known as "Asians" comprises about 60% of the global population. Also, IQ is not a measure of intelligence.

There are cultural reasons why some people in some "Asian" countries may do better on average in academics, such as stronger familial bonds, peer pressure and a greater cultural value placed on scholastic achievement, but that's far from proof that "Asians" are genetically and intellectually superior to other races, much less that therefore eugenics (and by extension the white supremacist ideology it was created to normalize, which ironically considered "Asians" to be subhuman) is "proven true."


If it was a cultural thing it would be a multi modal distribution.

It's most likely a combination of both genetics and society - neither are absolutes. There is no concrete evidence that intelligence is purely a social construct, nor that it is genetic. We simply don't know.

People get cancelled not for saying that it is genetic, but for questioning whether it may be. Of course, we will never know if we're not allowed to ask. Cancel culture is anti-science.

Watson may have been racist, but questioning whether there is a relationship between genetics and intelligence by itself is not racism.


We are allowed to ask this question, and we have asked it, and we've found that the evidence does not validate the premise of inherent racial intelligence or other racial essentialist views[0]. Claims like "Asians have the highest IQ" are not meaningful or scientifically valid.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Research...


This (https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171) US-government provided table of average SAT scores in the United States in 2023, which has breakdowns by race/ethnicity of the test-taker, and clearly shows Asians with the highest average score out of any of the racial categories in the chart, is evidence for something that you could pithily summarize as "Asians have the highest IQ". The relationship between SAT scores and IQ and intelligence in an everyday sense; and how representative people whose racial categorization went into this chart are of everyone on the planet who could also be grouped into that racial category; are more complicated questions. Nonetheless, the hypothesis that there are genetic differences between people of different racial groups that affect their intelligence in a similar way to how they affect more obvious racial correlates such as hair and skin color, is not obviously wrong.

>There is no concrete evidence that intelligence is purely a social construct, nor that it is genetic.

There isn't even any concrete evidence that it's a good thing.


Intelligence has a significant genetic component, otherwise it couldn't have evolved.

"Intelligence isn't genetic" is the left's version of creationism.


the sourcemap has been removed and repos DMCAd

Everyone reading this probably think it's about them

incredible tools, I love rampensau

also, beautiful site! https://elastiq.ch/


thanks!

I don't think it skips the handler behavior on default but can't check now

It does not. What it does do is submit the form, so if you trigger some fast change to the page or async behavior from the click event, you may never see it because the submission happens and the page reloads (or a different page loads if form action is set to a different URL). If you're relying on event bubbling, the click handler may run after the form is submitted, which is even less likely to do what you intend.

If you aren't expecting this (and don't know how to discover it e.g. by examining browser dev tools, server logs, etc.) then you'll assume the button is broken and... probably try something else.

Even if you do discover it, you may try something that won't quite have the same reliability - at one point it was common to see folks putting preventDefault() or return false in their click handlers to squelch the (correct) behavior, rather than changing the type of button.


Yes, you are right. Thanks for the lengthy explanation.

I don't understand this sentence. Can someone rephrase?

Also

> This isn’t just an inconvenience. It’s technofeudalism.

There are so many of these in the article. It's like a spit to the face


Come full circle by feeding the article back to your favorite LLM and ask it to TL;DR it for you.

> This isn’t just an inconvenience. It’s technofeudalism.

> This isn’t a todo list with hardcoded arrays. It’s a real app with database persistence (appears twice)

this article was written by ChatGPT. I'm tired


Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: