If the specialist cannot explain to the common population in a concise way the implications of carrying out a project of that size so that they can make a sensible choice in a vote,

There’s no concise way to explain something complicated to a layperson that doesn’t end with “trust me, I’m the expert”.

then the problem lies with the specialist, not the population. Giving that kind of explanation is education.

Shifting the blame doesn’t make the problem disappear. Whether the population is uneducated because of a lack of qualified specialists, or simply due to being incapable of understanding the information, the outcome is the same. You still have uninformed people making decisions.

I agree. Mass all the way. It’s especially complicated when the liquids are viscous and stick to your measuring vessel.

The only time volume is permitted is if it’s too light for a typical kitchen scale to measure.

I think you may have forgotten some of the context when you responded. We already have a consensus among experts that IQ isn’t intelligence. That’s not up for debate anymore. The question is whether or not intelligence can be measured, and the semantic question of defining intelligence is very important here. You can’t answer “how do we measure X?” without first defining what “X” is.

You would first need to define intelligence before you can measure it. We’re still nowhere near any kind of agreement on that first step.

I also apparently have high IQ according to online tests and my mind still glazes over conversations even when it’s a topic that I’m supposedly an expert on. I know all the words. If you were then down and I read them, I’ll be able to make perfect sense of them. But a real time conversation? Forget it.

Productivity is how fast I’m moving towards my goal. Its end goal is to reach my goal.

Easy enough to write. But reading and maintaining? That’s the hard part.

I find it amazing how little space corn syrup takes up relative to how much is produced. It’s no wonder we use it in everything.

It’s the only time where it’s relevant to the conversation, no? Why would you bring it up anywhere else?

Milk first makes it possible to get the wrong ratio of cereal to milk because

1. the cereal floats and you have no idea how much you put in there
2. You can underestimate how much volume the cereal takes up and not leave enough room in your bowl

Ah, the age-old unpopularopinions dilemma. Do I upvote because I agree, or upvote because it is unpopular and I disagree?

The community I’m currently subscribed to for this: !hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se

I like the one(s) that bring(s) in posts from Hacker News since they have a high likelihood of being interesting, and I like seeing what the people of Lemmy think of them. Other than that, I don’t think I’ve seen any others that add value to my Lemmy experience.

I’m assuming you’re talking about the US leadership? Eminem has been putting out music critical of every (2) Republican president since getting big.

I can’t find the post you’re referring to. Can you link it?

This makes way more sense than active suppression. If you don’t have an understanding of the context, then you can’t compress the memory. Every sound/sensation/image is unique and had to be remembered as a unique experience.

I’m saying that it makes no difference even if everyone did it. Denoising is trivial.

The noise you add won’t even register. No two people are going to half-ass it the same way, so if you average everyone’s responses, the correct answer comes out.

Because it can do something that the alternatives can’t do or because they refuse to use something more modern?

Where would that be a significant upgrade over entering the numbers on a calculator?