Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by karma_vaccum123 on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @12:01PM
(#12444459)
I just knew these comments would fill up with humblebrags from HNers who wish to casually and inoffensively proclaim their genius.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by sctb on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @04:39PM
(#12447433)
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12444131 and marked it off-topic.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by comex on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @12:41PM
(#12444835)
I don't think that's fair. It's pretty hard to talk about one's personal experience with the scenarios described in the article without it coming across as a brag, humble or otherwise.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by MagnumOpus on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:20PM
(#12445248)
Having tested in the 99th percentile of scholastic tests despite being a lazy git is not humblebrag, it is relevant to the discussion at hand.
Also, you might do well to assume that a large majority of the people here that you are trying to put down also tested in top percentages in school tests. The audience of YC and HN is self-selected nerds.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by karma_vaccum123 on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:29PM
(#12445331)
> Also, you might do well to assume that a large majority of the people here that you are trying to put down also tested in top percentages in school tests. The audience of YC and HN is self-selected nerds.
Which is exactly why so much of the discussion here is predicated on middlebrow intellectual checkboxes instead of legitimate insight.
But if you want to keep thinking this is some genius society, I can't stop you.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by digler999 on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:37PM
(#12445394)
> middlebrow intellectual checkboxes instead of legitimate insight.
Nice humblebrag about your superior judgement of whats "middlebrow" vs "legitimate".
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by karma_vaccum123 on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @04:18PM
(#12447167)
The post to which I was responding made the absurd claim that technically-minded/introverted individuals who score high on tests can approximate themselves to being geniuses. I really don't think it was much of a reach to ridicule that assertion...given that it is...well, ridiculous.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by digler999 on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:35PM
(#12445382)
Show me the law that says you're not allowed to talk about your own intelligence when its germane to the subject matter ? Is a mover not allowed to talk about the time he lifted a refrigerator up a flight of stairs cause thats "humblebragging" about how strong he is?
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by Pica_soO on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @12:05PM
(#12444507)
But if everyone is a genius, then no one is.
Les time spend comparing, more time spend focused on the one thing you love => genius status, but you wont notice, or wont give a thing about it.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by UlyssesSKrunk on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:23PM
(#12445272)
Oh please, get off your high horse and pull your head out of your ass. He's making a perfectly valid point. Anybody who genuinely believes some people cannot by innately better at some subjects to the point that they can study several grades ahead of their peers without putting in more effort is an idiot. Not everybody can learn what everybody else can by simply putting in more hours, innate ability is most definitely a thing.