White and male, Google releases diversity data

[Meresgi]

I agree that one shouldn't discount the problems occurring in rural suburbia among poor whites especially among the rampant drug abuse explosion and the shrinking opportunities that come with poverty/decay/vanishing manufacturing sector but even the poorest white person has advantages over their poor black kin.

This all depends on the area. The rural area I was from the social services were much more lenient on minorities when giving out benefits. Obviously this isn't in the same park as getting a job, but jobs were so limited that most people had to turn to HEAP/EBT/etc etc.

Last time I visited the population apparently has seen a large spike in black/hispanics moving up from NYC because of how lenient the area is and doesn't police/look into many fraud cases just because of how understaffed the police force/every office is. When I lived there back 5 years ago we had to have the fucking mayor drive a plow during winter because they had laid off most of the staff haha. Again not saying "Oh woe is me for being white".

[Blubbartron]

Motherfucking eugenics in my BG threads. Jesus fucking Christ. lol

Not one single person in this thread has made an argument towards disallowing people with "bad genes" from breeding, or encouraging people with "good genes" to breed more. GTFO with that baseless ad hominem.

[BaneTheBrawler]

ITT: blubb is black

[Aksannyi]

You might have a point correlating race with intelligence and genetics, if IQ were a completely static number that never changes during one's lifetime.

However, and I'm taking a class in this right now (Well, it's called "Human Development and Learning"), we just got done talking about the fact that IQ can and does change over people's lives. Not to mention the fact that IQ tests are incredibly flawed. IQ tests are not standard and therefore can yield different scores, there are numerous factors that may undermine how a student does which will impact their score (think diet, lack of sleep, stress, etc.), they vary by age group so the way you test younger kids differs from the way you test older kids - and how do you accurately compare something like that with no control method? You obviously can't test a 6 year old the way you would a 16 year old, so how do you compare if, at a base line, the 16 year old is more or less intelligent than the 6 year old when they took two different tests? We as a society do want to know our baseline intelligence but the truth is, I'm starting to think there is no actual such thing.

There are multiple theories on intelligence, including Spearmen (factor of g), Cattell, (factor of gf and gc), Sternberg (triarchic theory of intelligence), Gardner (multiple intelligences), and there are probably more that I have yet to study or attempt to understand. And I'm not going to dive too deeply into those, though I gave enough for people to look into them on their own, if they'd like. The point is, if you have all these theories on intelligence, which is the correct one? And if you have all these theories of intelligence, how do you accurately test for intelligence? Intelligence isn't just this baseline thing like your eye color or the color of your skin - something that basically stays static throughout life. Intelligence is a constantly morphing and changing thing. You can't say that intelligence is 100% genetic. Maybe a part of it is, but development in early childhood, through school, and throughout life are more determinant than genetics when talking about intelligence.

Here, I snapped this from my textbook. It's called Educational Psychology - Developmental Learners by Jean Ormrod. I could do a full APA citation but you get the idea. Note the parts I highlighted:


(Just so you know I'm not pulling this all out of my ass, and yeah I didn't feel like typing all of that.) So yeah. I'm going to have to agree that socioeconomic status plays a much larger role than people would believe. Socioeconomic status also influences those things I mentioned - early childhood development -- mother or father or both are out of the house a lot, working multiple jobs, child is left with a daycare or a babysitter, probably of the low-income sort and thus not there to truly foster development but mostly just be an adult supervisor while the parent is at work, and at school --their late start in early childhood development can be partially to blame here as studies have shown that early childhood cognitive development is a huge factor in how kids do at school, as well as the aforementioned parents gone a lot, no role models, already starting to see the struggle and realizing that their parent(s) went through the same and look where they are, etc.

That is one of the biggest factors in education. If you were to eradicate poverty and actually give all kids a 100% equal chance at every single opportunity from birth through high school, then you might be able to test intelligence by a number and then try to say that genetics has a role in IQ score. But you can't.

[test123]

[Correction]

This just in, south americans and africans have low per capita income because of genetics.
Not because of centuries of colonial exploitation and slavery.
test's last map isn't even labeled

can we ban this racist motherfucker for thread shitting of the highest order yet?

[BerenTebogo]

Implying the SAT tests a single intellectual factor other than "How much did you study for the SAT."

Get the fuck out. Anyone with half a brain knows that ETS is archaic and ridiculous.

Edit: For reference, I used to work at The Princeton Review, an organization that exists solely to teach you how to take the SAT without knowing the answers to the SAT questions. If you can score high on something by process of elimination and guessing, it isn't a good metric. This is why actuarial exams and the like penalize you for guessing and don't penalize you for leaving a question blank, because actual mathematicians don't like the idea of people guessing (or being coached) their way to a good score.

[BerenTebogo]

Who lets these scrubs in the front door around here? Honestly.

[test123]

Who lets these scrubs in the front door around here? Honestly.

[BerenTebogo]

Like, you can get banned for calling someone a beaner in a thread nobody ever reads but if you truly, honestly, think entire other races of people are below you and should serve you in general you're A-OK.

Better wait for Test to call someone a bitch, then someone might notice.

I'm not one to infringe on what people have to say, but this shit stopped being amusing and started being genuinely disgusting a few threads ago.

[Correction]

Google: Since 2010 we’ve given more than $40 million to organizations working to bring computer science education to women and girls. And we’ve been working with historically black colleges and universities to elevate coursework and attendance in computer science. For example, this year Google engineer Charles Pratt was in-residence at Howard University, where he revamped the school’s Intro to CS curriculum.

test123: They're genetically inferior and just aren't qualified because they're black.

[Edelweiss]

Like, you can get banned for calling someone a beaner in a thread nobody ever reads but if you truly, honestly, think entire other races of people are below you and should serve you in general you're A-OK.

Better wait for Test to call someone a bitch, then someone might notice.

I'm not one to infringe on what people have to say, but this shit stopped being amusing and started being genuinely disgusting a few threads ago.

Maybe he needs to Tweek out before he's banished to join the other great dumb, racist, hateful, and awful people of our time. Or a donation ban or something, whatever.

Maybe if he tells us what he really thinks about the gays?

[test123]

Like, you can get banned for calling someone a beaner in a thread nobody ever reads but if you truly, honestly, think entire other races of people are below you and should serve you in general you're A-OK.

So you go on forums to only talk with people you agree with; and get upset and want bans when someone voices a different view? Who is intolerant now?

[BerenTebogo]

Me, of genuine and hostile racism.

[Aksannyi]

Has his title always been that way, or did someone change it recently?

[notorious bum]

Neo-nazis love to lecture about intolerance. The irony is never lost.

[test123]

How does accepting the fact that blacks have lower IQ make me a neo-nazi?

[Edelweiss]

Has his title always been that way, or did someone change it recently?

It's been that for awhile. You can only tolerate so many RON PAUL (is he riding the Rand Paul dick now?) or LIBERTARIANISM fantasy threads before you just call him out on being fucking retarded.

Obviously someone with the power to change his title decided to call him a fucking retard.

[BerenTebogo]

Because as stated multiple times, not a single person here is accepting it as fact besides you and blub.

And when you assert something without providing valid evidence it isn't a fact, and in this case it is thinly veiled hate and racism. Fuck you.

[AidenCarby]

At least they're good at sports right?