Ask HN: Did you get "never have to work again rich" through software?

Re:Ask HN: Did you get "never have to work again rich" throu... by dllthomas on Wednesday July 02, 2014 @03:45PM (#7979213)

Strictly speaking, "If you are selecting based on looks (as opposed to picking randomly)" simply implies that you believe fewer attractive women are intelligent, proportionally. This actually could be reasonable without thinking less of attractive women, if you assume that attractive and intelligent women are likely to already be taken, but it's still certainly an assumption.

It gets even less damning if we say "If you are selecting based on looks (as opposed to picking based on intelligence)". It should be uncontroversial that a group of women selected for intelligence is going to be smarter than one selected based on an uncorrelated (or even weakly correlated) feature.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Did you get "never have to work again rich" throu... by graeme on Wednesday July 02, 2014 @05:34PM (#7979890)

Thank you, that's what I meant. I just wrote a paragraph in another comment, but you expressed it much more concisely.

Searching based on looks rather than (traits likely to signify) intelligence is likely to lead to less intelligence found, even if the subset (attractive women) is equally likely to be intelligent.

[ Parent | on HN ]