The murder of Charlie Kirk
Can we all admit that the majority of extremism is coming from the left over the last handful of years?
Apparently they j
I’m comparing people here with my entire experience of people across all groups, not any singular bubble. I’m not sure what you’re not understanding.Also, to be serious for a moment, I don’t think being gifted as a child automatically means you will be a gifted adult. I saw this happen a lot to peers where they expected the power of their big special brains to float them to suc
Ok, but you just said you were comparing with that 12yo college group.
I still think my comparison is more appropriate, but I certainly can't prove it.
I also think the average person in a poker room at any time is more intelligent than the average person overall. And the people who bother to join a poker forum is likely to be more intelligent than the average poker player.
Ok, but you just said you were comparing with that 12yo college group.
I still think my comparison is more appropriate, but I certainly can't prove it.
I also think the average person in a poker room at any time is more intelligent than the average person overall. And the people who bother to join a poker forum is likely to be more intelligent than the average poker player.
No. And that’s exactly the issue. You have confused skill with intelligence. Skill can be taught.
Poker players have for decades fetishized themselves as being above average in intelligence. I don’t know if this is just part of the standard personality that is drawn to poker and gambling and gaming, but it’s a cognitive bias that is just not based in reality.
I know this will just get a snarky reply, but isn’t this the same “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” rhetoric that conservatives love? I mean sure you can see how they would also think that people who aren’t doing well in life just didn’t try hard enough, just like how you think that people raised in a certain environment just didn’t choose the right ethics in spite of that?
I see the comparison, but I think that opening one's mind to ideas opposed to those by which they were raised is much easier than raising one's income and wealth from being born in poverty.
The first only requires a change in the mind. The second requires changes in many other things out of one's control, including changing the minds of others.
No. And that’s exactly the issue. You have confused skill with intelligence. Skill can be taught.
Poker players have for decades fetishized themselves as being above average in intelligence. I don’t know if this is just part of the standard personality that is drawn to poker and gambling and gaming, but it’s a cognitive bias that is just not based in reality.
No I'm not, because I know most people in a poker room are not skilled in poker. That's not what I'm basing it on.
I play mostly in games where most players are very bad at poker. But I've had conversations with them and find many of those bad poker players to be capable of having very intelligent conversations about a wide variety of topics. Many are doctors, lawyers, successful small business owners, or former corporate executives. All have significant financial resources, or they wouldn't be able to regularly play (and lose) in what is usually the highest stake game in the room.
Anyway, I’m sorry for this derail. It’s my fault. You all are very very smart. Definitely very fine people on both sides.
Let’s get back to the Luciom show
No I'm not, because I know most people in a poker room are not skilled in poker. That's not what I'm basing it on. I play mostly in games where most players are very bad at poker. But I've had conversations with them and find many of those bad poker players to be capable of having very intelligent conversations about a wide variety of topics. Many are doctors, lawyers, succes
High stakes games are going to have a higher percentage of intelligent people for the reasons you just described. I’m speaking about poker as a whole.
When you walk into the WSOP and you get a whiff of a thousand unwiped asses from the exposed butt cracks of the slobs in those seats, you think to yourself “these are some pretty smart guys”?
In the actual existing world -- outside the US, where everything is just recreational bourgeois cosplay -- tankies are aggressive British doctrinaire Communists who supported Soviet repression in Eastern Europe, particularly the sending of Red Army tanks into Prague in 1968, and could definitely not be considered 'liberals' even in the frankly bizarre US use of that term.
I don't really hang out w/ tankies, just using an old expression that conservatives used to call liberals.
Even being a genius or one of the goat in 1 field doesn’t mean you are proficient in other fields aka robert james fisher for example .
Pretty basic concept shrug .
Probably why you see Nobel price winners or field experts sometimes makes very stupid comments outside their field expertise.
Those are the favourite sources conspiracy theorist love to use .
I also think the average person in a poker room at any time is more intelligent than the average person overall. And the people who bother to join a poker forum is likely to be more intelligent than the average poker player.
OK, but do you have facts to back up either of these assumptions?
I'm curious about this whole ''leftists are anti-white racists''.
Let's say for a minute it's true, then explain this frequent answer from MAGATS and the right (in the USA it seems, based on the few posters here):
-Trump cannot be racist, he has black friends!
-this dude cannot be antisemite he has jewish friends!
Based on that we could infer :
-this dude isn't racist towards whites, he has white friends!
-bro this dude is literally white!
I don’t think most on the left are anti-white racists, but I do find the idea that white kids have to be kept down to pay for their ancestor’s racial sins to be kind of distasteful to a liberal society.
I don't know whether DEI is profitable or not, but I know this is wrong. Most large companies abandoned DEI because the Trump administration made it clear that they would face legal action if they didn't do so.
nope, microsoft did in summer 2024
when you keep a white person out of a college to give the slot to a latino with 30 points less or a black with 70 points less, that's punishing that person because he is white.
You know it, it's transparent, it's completly illegal, it is morally horrific and yet you are ok with it.
According to the NAACP white students were 50% of college admissions despite making up 57% of the population. So do you support affirmative action for whites?
when you keep a white person out of a college to give the slot to a latino with 30 points less or a black with 70 points less, that's punishing that person because he is white.
You know it, it's transparent, it's completly illegal, it is morally horrific and yet you are ok with it.
Nobody is “punishing” white people
If a resource is scarce and any group is given that resource more ceteris paribus than white people, then that's punishing white people.
When a democrat president says "i want a black person for this job" that's punishing all non black people for example. Explicitly.
If a resource is scarce and any group is given that resource more ceteris paribus than white people, then that's punishing white people.
When a democrat president says "i want a black person for this job" that's punishing all non black people for example. Explicitly.
Ceteris paribus. All else being equal.
That is the issue. All else is not equal.
You guys sound like ****ing idiots.
High stakes games are going to have a higher percentage of intelligent people for the reasons you just described. I’m speaking about poker as a whole.
When you walk into the WSOP and you get a whiff of a thousand unwiped asses from the exposed butt cracks of the slobs in those seats, you think to yourself “these are some pretty smart guys”?
The few times I played at the WSOP I went straight to the mixed game tables.
No, and I don't even have test results. It's a judgment call, but I think I'm generally pretty good at judging relative intelligence.
For example, I think you are one of the least intelligent regular posters on this forum, but I still would put you in the upper half of the US.
Whoever thinks poker players are smarter haven't ever played where I play.
According to the NAACP white students were 50% of college admissions despite making up 57% of the population. So do you support affirmative action for whites?
I guess I just wonder how long black people will be able to enjoy this privilege over white people in admissions until we think enough is enough? And if the stats about a reversal in trends after AA is taken away are true (I didn’t look into it) will it mean that as soon as it’s considered “enough” that things will just go back to the way they are anyway?
If that is what it means then it sounds very plausibly like a collective punishment. But as long as the people that support it feel like good people who are anti-racist for doing so, that’s what matters.
