Always an excuse

John Scalzi ✔ @scalzi
Friends posting results of an online test to show they have a huge vocabulary. But it’s not how many words you know. It’s how you use them.

 John Scalzi ✔ @scalzi
Also, I suspect posting the results of an online test to show how smart/learned/nerdy you are is a test in itself, isn’t it.

 John Scalzi ✔ @scalzi
I mean, don’t get me wrong, have fun with online tests. Just maybe don’t use them to re-litigate your performance on the SAT.

Translation: he scored below the top one percent and is ashamed to admit it.

Which would be no surprise, considering that he’s not in the top two percent of IQ either. Neither, as it happens, is Wil Wheaton, which didn’t stop him from delivering a rather cringe-worthy speech to American Mensa:

I am now going to talk to you about something that I think is the geekiest thing of all, a thing that most of us have in common, regardless of which particular part of geek culture we hold closest to our hearts: anxiety.

I have this thing called Imposter Syndrome, and I guess it’s fairly common among creative people. The way it works is this part of my brain that’s supposed to be on my side but is really a dick about everything goes, “You know, you suck at everything and you don’t deserve to be here and nobody likes you because you suck. Boy do you suck. You are the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked.”

This voice is relentless, even though I’m supposed to be successful enough to ignore it and show it physical evidence of its bullshit in the form of awards and a happy marriage and two awesome kids, it never, ever, ever shuts up. But while I was preparing for tonight, it overplayed its hand. It filled me with so much anxiety, it reminded me of an article I read about a study which indicated that highly intelligent people tend to have generalized anxiety and other mental health issues at a rate that is significantly greater than a control group.

And when I read that, I knew that I wanted to talk about it. because it doesn’t matter if I’m just a writer or just an actor or just a geek or just any of the things my stupid brain tells me I “just” am. All of us here, at one time or another in our lives, have had a hard time relating to people who just don’t get us. We are constantly surrounded by people who just see a loaf of bread, or don’t care how things work, as long as they work. They don’t stay up at night, unable to sleep, because they can’t stop thinking about how thin our atmosphere is, relative to the size of our planet, and how terrifying it is that we’re basically these tiny little things on a giant hunk of rock speeding through space at like 30 kilometers per second and what the hell is space, anyway? And if we really are in a computer simulation, what’s the computer running it in? And can I somehow break out of the program to find out? Wait. If I can think that, it’s just part of my programming so does that mean that free will is oh hey the sun is coming up and I haven’t slept at all.

And it’s not that we want to do this, right? It’s that we can’t help it. It doesn’t matter if you’re an engineer, an artist, an athlete, or a blacksmith. Look around you – everyone here has their own internal monologue. It’s what separates us from animals, that constant conversation going on in all our heads. And when we feel nervous about something – that voice is what helps us rise above the fight or flight instinct of animals – it can soothe us, talk us down, talk us up – or in some cases – blather on and make things worse. When you’re smart, and faced with a problem, this voice starts to break things down, so you can solve it. “Here is the problem. Here are its individual pieces. Now, how do we solve this rationally and logically.” It is not unreasonable to expect that by breaking down a problem into pieces, we should be able to make those pieces follow rules. And rules are comfortable and comforting and make us feel safe.

But anyone who has ever tried to reason with an unreasonable person knows that more frequently than we’d like, the pieces just will NOT follow the rules, even though they should follow the rules, because that’s the simplest and most efficient and most logical way to get things done. And here comes that voice again, only this time it’s telling us that everything is terrible and nothing will ever follow the rules and we’re all going to die and the frogurt is also cursed.

That voice speaks to me almost every day, and if I could just make it stop, I would, but I have mental illness. I have anxiety and depression, and I want you to know that if you do, too, you are not alone. If you’re like me, you get frustrated that the thing that makes you special, your big beautiful brain that is so smart and capable of so much more than some muggle’s brain is, actively fucks with you every day.

And it makes you wonder: If I’m so smart, why is my brain so dumb? Why can’t my brain just get with the program, and stop worrying about everything all the time? My life is great! I love my job. I love my family. I love my home and my pets. I love everything I get to do in this amazing world, and I haven’t even scratched the surface of what there is to explore on this planet! I make art that matters and I inspire people to do cool stuff … so why do I feel so terrible about myself all the time?

Oh, right. Because my brain is broken. There’s all sorts of interesting medical and neurochemical reasons for it, and I’ve learned everything I can about them, but knowing all of that isn’t enough to make my brain magically start processing serotonin and norepinephrine and dopamine in a balanced way, so that I won’t feel like my career is over when I’m not cast in The Dark Tower or Ready Player One,and feel like nothing is worth doing for days at a time, even though I know how irrational that is.

This is where being really smart is kind of the worst. All the skills that we’ve learned over the course of our lives, the things that set us apart from average people, they really don’t help. In fact, the frustration that we feel when those skills don’t work can actually make it all worse, because it’s not only unfair, it’s irrational! It isn’t following the rules, and this isn’t Vietnam, Dude.

And it makes you feel really, really alone. Like, you are the only person who has ever felt this way, and the only person who ever will feel this way, and if you just tried a little harder, you wouldn’t feel this way. But you do feel this way, because you’re alone. Yep, you’re alone and nobody can help you. In fact, it wouldn’t be surprised if you’re the only one with this infernal internal monologue. Look around you – nobody else seems to have this problem. It’s just you.

So anxiety is what makes the geek? No wonder I’ve never fit in with their weird little culture. What Wheaton is describing has nothing to do with being smart; I’m considerably smarter than him and I don’t suffer from anxiety or Imposter Syndrome, much less depression. Moreover, I know many highly intelligent people who don’t suffer from any of those things, but are very happy and well-adjusted individuals.

While there are probably some purely physical or developmental factors involved, the main reason people like Wheaton and Scalzi are unhappy and mentally broken is spiritual in nature. They are addicted to lies, a philosophical addiction that can be every bit as debilitating as a physical addiction. This addiction is a result of pride, as can be seen in Wheaton’s references to “average people” and “muggles”, and the fact that this pride is unjustified is the reason that Wheaton feels like an imposter. He feels like an imposter because he is an imposter.

Higher-than-average intelligence doesn’t make you any better than anyone else, any more than being taller, or faster, or stronger does. What it often does, however, is allow others to convince you that you should be something different than you are, or than you want to be. Even worse, it gives you the ability to successfully rationalize away your failures, to both yourself and others. Thus are created the Secret Kings who never, ever lose to anyone at anything, and yet feel like failures and imposters all the same.

One thing I’ve noticed about all these people with broken minds is that none of them ever seem to have played sports. None of them seems to know what it is like to try your hardest, play your very best, and still fall short. None of them seems to have known the security of winning the respect and approval of an opponent. Thus, they are always attempting to fill the hole of insecurity in their souls through various means that can never do so.

They also tend to be vehemently irreligious, which again tends to go back to pride.

So, if you have a broken mind, if you feel anxious and insecure, if you feel like an imposter, I have two pieces of advice.

1. Humble yourself before God.
2. Give Man the opportunity to humble you.

I’m not self-confident because I’m smart, or because I’m athletic, or because pretty girls like me, I’m self-confident because I have allowed myself to be tested, repeatedly, and I have passed the tests. The test is not winning. The test is getting up after you are knocked down, being a good sport when you are beaten, meeting rejection with grace, meeting failure with good humor, and accepting your assigned place in the social hierarchy without demur or complaint.

You can’t change the past or the present. All you can change is how you approach the vicissitudes of the future.

Winning feels great. I like to win as anyone else. I’ve won everything from grade school competitions to NCAA Division One conference championships. But even better than winning, in terms of developing self-respect, is having the rival who has beaten you despite your best efforts treat you with respect, as an equal, and above all, as a worthy opponent.

And I’m not proud of my intelligence because I know what it is worth in comparison to the glory of the Creator and the magnificence of His Creation, which is precisely nothing. It means nothing more than the color of a spot on a dog’s coat or the pattern on a snake’s skin.

Wil Wheaton, on the other hand, has a different solution:

Here’s what I need you guys to do. I need this entire room of people to make a pact. It’s just us, so what happens here in beautiful downtown San Diego, stays in beautiful downtown San Diego. So here it goes. You are the superheroes we need. But the world doesn’t know it yet. But they will. And something cataclysmic will occur, and the world will cry out, “who will save us?” And I need you to be ready to burst out of the crowd, rip open your shirt to expose your true identity and say proudly, “I’m ready! I am the SUPERHERO YOU NEED!”

Fantastic. Now they’re not just Secret Kings, they’re Secret fucking Superheroes and only these very special snowflakes can save the world.

No wonder they feel like imposters. They never stop posturing.

Linguistic racists

Language SJWs are parochial monolinguistic English supremacists whose campaign to degender the language is intrinsically racist and indubitably offensive:

There is apparently a powerful movement afoot among the no-gender-in-anything crowd to replace the venerable gender specific singular pronouns “he” and “she” with sexually neutral but normally plural “they.” The debate over the pronouns was recently discussed in a Huffington Post piece entitled “It’s Time to Embrace the Singular ‘They:’ A Humanistic Pronoun,” written by the appropriately named Maddie Crum, the “Cultural Editor” for Huffpost (honest, I am not making this up!)

Corporate America and many in academia have long embraced using a form of “they” in grammatically challenged sentences like “Everyone is entitled to their opinion” but Crum goes much farther than that, providing as an example of her preferred usage “My friend ate a bagel. They beamed with perfect joy.” She never quite explains why “they” singular is “humanistic” but she describes the proposed ascendancy of “they” as the linguistic equivalent of “tearing down gendered bathroom signs” and eliminating other “dividers and stand between men, women and people who identify as non-binary.” One commenter on her piece refers to the emergence of an “identity-sensitive lexicon.” And for those who still doubt, Crum notes that the “verbally gracious” singular “they” was awarded the “Word of the Year” prize by the world renowned American Dialect Society! Crum also observes sagaciously that using “they” instead of the sexist pronouns provides anonymity on the internet.

So, are German speakers to begin referring to Das Frau and Das Mann in addition to Das Madchen? It would certainly be easier to replace Der Die Das Die, Den Die Das Die, Dem Der Dem Den with Das Die, Das Die, and Dem Den.

That would actually work, whether the Germans were amenable or not. But in Italian, where there is no Neuter, are we to refer to il macchino for the car or la libra for the book? The same goes for French, where not only the gendered “the” would need to be changed, but the suffixes as well. Shall we say le femme or la homme?

Frankly, the whole thing smacks of cultural supremacy and racism. We should probably listen to Ben Shapiro, hunt them down, and hurt their careers.

Of cause and effect

It’s remarkable to me that so many sports commentators completely lack the ability to understand the consequences of changes in the leagues they are covering, oftentimes of changes they themselves recommended.

Consider how Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk has no idea why viewership for the Major League Baseball All-Star game is down.

Tuesday’s Major League Baseball All-Star Game garnered an all-time low 8.7 million viewers, continuing a downward trend in that game’s popularity. In the 1970s the MLB All-Star game routinely topped 30 million viewers, and until 1996 it had never dropped below 20 million. Now the MLB All-Star Game has had fewer than 12 million viewers for six consecutive years.

Florio thinks it is due to cable and satellite TV packages allowing people to watch whatever teams they want. That may be part of it, but I assume the much more significant factor is this:

For the first time in Major League Baseball history, teams from the American League and National League competed in regular season, head-to-head competition during the 1997 campaign.

What happened is that MLB considerably reduced the distinction between the American League and the National League. So it should not be surprising that far fewer people care anymore about a competition between them as a result. There is no longer anything special about interleague play, it’s just part of the normal game now.

There is an important lesson in this for those NFL cretins who stupidly bemoan the fact that an 11-5 team in a strong division might miss the playoffs or be forced to play on the road against an 8-8 division winner. The more that differences between the eight divisions are enhanced, the more significance to a division title there is, leading to more interest in the playoffs and the playoff stretch run. It would make absolutely no sense for the NFL to go the way of the NBA, where divisions are irrelevant and it is only a team’s win-loss rank in the conference that matters.

Fortunately, the NFL seems to understand this, as in the last three years they’ve modified their scheduling to ensure that the last two weeks of the season are loaded with intra-divisional competitions that are, more often than not, significant.

Heads they win

Tails, you get three years in prison:

What happened then is the same thing that happened with the other two notorious “spoofers” who have gained prominence in the recent year, Nav Sarao and Igor Oystacher: they got too good. So good in fact the HFTs – mostly Citadel – were consistently losing money to them. As a result, Coscia et al had to be punished. He was accused of entering large orders into futures markets in 2011 that he never intended to execute. His goal, prosecutors said, was to spoof, or fool other traders to markets by creating an illusion of demand so that he could make money on smaller trades. Prosecutors said he illegally earned $1.4 million in fewer than three months in 2011 through spoofing.

As Reuters added, Coscia’s firm had fewer than 10 employees. However, he “entered more large orders than anyone else in the world” in nearly a dozen CME Group Inc markets ranging from corn and soybeans to gold after he began using two algorithmic trading programs in August 2011, prosecutors said during the trial. To be sure Coscia disagreed with the accusation: he testified that he didn’t do anything wrong and repeatedly said he intended to trade on every order he placed. He also said he traded a lot of large orders he placed. He was asked whether he fraudulently induced other market participants to react to the deceptive market information he created.

“I didn’t induce anyone,” Coscia said. “There’s no deceptive market information either.”

Technically, he is right – he did not induce anyone. He induced a whole of anythings, mostly countless HFT algos that reacted to his orders by pushing the market in the direction of his orderflow, only to be “spoofed.” At which point the case really boiled down to just one thing: not whether it is legal to spoof, which it is and yet massive, well-connected HFT firms get away with it every single day, but whether it is legal to take advantage of HFT algos programmed to do just one thing – frontrun orders, and activity which leads to massive losses for the algos and the Citadels behind them, when the spoofer realizes just how dumb his counterparty truly is.

The verdict was clear: nobody is allowed to outspoof the spoofers. And this was the punchline from the lobby of very group of people who take advantage of broken markets every given day:

    “Investors are better off when spoofers who prey on high-frequency traders are brought to justice,” said Bill Harts, chief of the Modern Markets Initiative, a group representing high-frequency and algorithmic traders.
Funnier words had rarely been spoken by the person whose “Modern Markets” Initiative has made real modern markets a farcial disaster.

And so the gauntlet has been thrown: anyone who dares to make money by “abusing” the dumb logic of Citadel algos will go to jail.

To make it simple, the big banks have computerized trading programs that prey upon conventional traders. But their behavior is predictable, so a sufficiently clever trader can take advantage of them in much the same way they take advantage of normal investors.

But only the big banks are allowed to cheat. So, do not pass go, do not collect your winnings, go directly to jail.

The stock market isn’t even a casino. Casinos are considerably less rigged.

Trump makes up the gap

He hasn’t even begun campaigning in earnest against Crooked Hillary Clinton and already Donald Trump is poised to take the swing states:

With a drop in grades on honesty and moral standards, Democrat Hillary Clinton loses an 8-point lead over Republican Donald Trump in Florida, and finds herself in too-close-to-call races in the three critical swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.

Clinton loses ground on almost every measure from a June 21 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. The Swing State Poll focuses on Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania because since 1960 no candidate has won the presidential race without taking at least two of these three states.

The presidential matchups show:

  •     Florida – Trump at 42 percent to Clinton’s 39, compared to a 47 – 39 percent Clinton lead June 21;
  •     Ohio – Clinton and Trump tied 41 – 41 percent, compared to a 40 – 40 percent tie June 21;
  •     Pennsylvania – Trump at 43 percent to Clinton’s 41 percent, compared to June 21, when Clinton had 42 percent to Trump’s 41 percent. With third party candidates in the race, results are:
  •     Florida – Trump leads Clinton 41 – 36 percent, with 7 percent for Libertarian Gary Johnson and 4 percent for Green Party candidate Jill Stein;
  •     Ohio – Trump at 37 percent to Clinton’s 36 percent, with Johnson at 7 percent and Stein at 6 percent;
  •     Pennsylvania – Trump over Clinton 40 – 34 percent with 9 percent for Johnson and 3 percent for Stein.

“Donald Trump enters the Republican Convention on a small roll in the three most important swing states in the country. He has wiped out Hillary Clinton’s lead in Florida; is on the upside of too-close to call races in Florida and Pennsylvania and is locked in a dead heat in Ohio,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

Remember, you heard predictions of a Trumpslide here first. Trump isn’t merely going to win, he’s going to win big because Crooked Hillary is a spectacularly bad candidate, and the chances that she’s going to survive the inevitable presidential debates intact are slim at best.

Scott Adams concurs:

The new Quinnipiac poll shows Trump now leading in 4-out-of-5 battleground states. Most of the polling was done before the FBI announced its email server decision. Do you know what else was happening during that time to influence polls?

Answer: Nothing

In other words, Trump didn’t do anything outrageous for a few weeks. That’s all he needs to do from here on out – more nothing – to win in a landslide. The “Crooked Hillary” harpoon he landed a few months ago is bleeding her out. Trump’s glide path to victory involves picking his cabinet and acting serious for a few months. That’s all it will take.

Trolls are federal criminals now

This Court of Appeals decision should making policing the blog considerably easier for the moderators:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has handed down a very important decision on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Facebook v. Vachani, which I flagged just last week. For those of us worried about broad readings of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the decision is quite troubling. Its reasoning appears to be very broad. If I’m reading it correctly, it says that if you tell people not to visit your website, and they do it anyway knowing you disapprove, they’re committing a federal crime of accessing your computer without authorization….

As I read the court’s opinion, the main issue is state of mind. Did you know that the computer owner didn’t want you to visit the website? At first, Power didn’t know Facebook’s view. But after the cease-and-desist letter, Power knew Facebook’s position. As a result, it was a federal crime to use Facebook after having received Facebook’s letter telling it to stay away. If I’m reading the opinion correctly, it appears that every contact with the computer that its owner doesn’t want is “without authorization.” The main question becomes mens rea: The visit becomes a federal crime when the visitor knows that the computer owner doesn’t want it.

Got that, everyone? If I tell you to go away, and you continue to visit or comment here, you are committing a federal crime. I’m sure the FBI doesn’t have anything better to do than investigate violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, so I trust you will comply.

“A horrifying mess”

The verdict is in: Grrlbusters is even worse than anticipated:

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

SJWs always destroy everything they converge.

Buckle up, Star Citizens

Derek Smart reports that a former backer has defeated the new Star Citizen Terms of Service that tries to deny backers the ability to get refunds from Cloud Imperium Games.

A backer who, like so many that contact me, use my online resources for navigating this farce etc, has been fighting diligently for over a month to get a refund of $3K from CIG/RSI after they changed the ToS and stripped him of rights he already had, has PREVAILED.

It’s only going to get worse from here on out, seeing as I have now been made aware that the LA county consumer protection office is also looking into similar complaints, and complainants (regardless of where you live here in the US or overseas) have been advised to file a complaint on their website.

Notice how Ortwin ( that would be this guy), Chris Roberts’ long-time business partner (and entertainment attorney), basically lied (I have now made them aware of this in detail) to the Attorney General’s office when he stated the following – in writing (!):

i) cited the ToS which the backer never agreed to, hence the whole point of the refund battle

ii) states that the backer has an agreement with RSI; when in fact the backer (like all backers before the ToS change) actually has an agreement with CIG. Note that this is all part of them shifting the liability from the more established CIG entity to one of the several shell corps associated with this train-wreck.

It looks very much as if the pyramid is starting to crumble. Once more, we see that despite the doubters, time has proven Derek Smart to be correct. Don’t be surprised if he turns out to be right about the rest of it too.

Some of the True Believers are already losing their faith:

This game has shown me one major thing: Never back something that strays from its kickstarted objective. Star Citizen was supposed to be some freaking Wing Commander that was amazing and up to date, then it basically fucked its backers by COMPLETELY straying off course and trying to be some end all be all game. CIG basically lied to its original backers and told them “thanks for the money, NOW GO FUCK YOURSELF”. When I heard about this game all I knew was…joy, joy that came from the dream of a supreme space game.

After buying a package, I was officially inducted into the Cult of Star Citizen. Anyone who dared question my holy game would be called a troll, idiot, or not know one thing about game development. After a while I started having doubts in my head after so many delays, but I kept putting them deeper and deeper in my head only to have them resurface with a vengeance.

After I started thinking about the game and what these so called “trolls” were saying, I realized something: This game is already vaporware and a scam. Think about it; its missed constant deadlines, keeps asking for more money for basically concept art, and is completely different than was originally promised…This..is..FRAUD.

The thing is, all of the veterans in the industry realized, around a year ago, that the game wasn’t going to come out. Scope creep, particularly in an already sizable project, is a killer, and Star Citizen suffered from more scope creep than any game I can recall. This is something we cover in DevGame; the combination of a visionary designer and a weak producer is always a dangerous one because the primary purpose of the producer is to rein in the designer and focus on completing the designer’s original vision.

And, of course, the involvement of the principal’s wife is always a red flag in any business. Meanwhile, COD: Infinite Warfare looks absolutely amazing. It’s particularly fun for me to notice the gravity effects, since RMR was the first shooter to utilize turning gravity on and off as a weapon.

The crucial question

Fred Reed asks one of the most important questions of tomorrow’s post-economics society:

The first crucial question of coming decades: Who is going to buy the stuff pouring from robotic factories?

The current notion is that when a yoyo factory automates and lays off most of its workers, they will find other well-paid jobs and continue to buy yoyos. But as well-paid jobs everywhere go automated, where will the money come from to buy yoyos? Today participation in the work force is at all- time lows and we have a large and growing number of young who, unable to find good jobs, live with their parents. They are not buying houses or renting apartments. (They may, given the intellectual level of today’s young, be buying yoyos.)

Enthusiasts of the free market say that I do not understand economics, that there will always be work for people who want to work. But there isn’t. There won’t be. There is less all the time. Again, look at the falling participation in the work force, the growing numbers in part-time badly paid jobs. Short of governmentally imposed minimums, wages are determined by the market, meaning that if a robot works for a dollar an hour, a human will have to work for ninety-five cents an hour to compete , or find a job a robot can’t do–and these get scarcer.

From a businessman’s point of view, robots are superb employees. They don’t strike, demand raises, call in sick, get disgruntled and do a sloppy job, or require benefits. Building factories that are robotic from the gitgo means not having to lay workers off, which is politically easier than firing existing workers. Using robots obviates the Chinese advantage in wages, especially if America can make better robots–good for companies, but not for workers in either country. That is, production may return to the US, but jobs will not. In countries with declining populations, having robots do the work may reduce the attractiveness of importing uncivilizable bomb-chucking morons from the bush world.

A second crucial question: What will we do with people who have nothing to do? This has been a hidden problem for a long time, solved to date by child-labor laws, compulsory attendance in high school, the growth of universities as holding tanks, welfare populations, and vast bureaucracies of people who pretend to be employed. Few of these do anything productive, but are supported and kept off the job market by the rest of us. But there are limits to the capacity of Starbuck’s to soak up college graduates. (The economic fate of America may depend on our consumption of overpriced coffee.)

As time goes on and fewer and fewer people can find work, and particularly the less intelligent, something will have to give. We won’t see it coming. We never see anything coming. Businessmen will observe productivity going up and labor costs going down. What could be wrong with that? Businessmen do not concern themselves with social questions. Methinks, however, that social questions are about to concern themselves with businessmen.

As standards of living decrease, unrest will come.

My father and I first began discussing this back in 1985. I remember it well, as we were driving to his office together after I’d helped him take one of the family cars into the car dealership for servicing.

“I employ over 100 people,” he said. “And how many of them actually do anything? How many of them sit in an office looking at paper? That’s what they do. That’s what I do. But except for a few people like the guy at the dealership who will fix the car, no one is really doing anything.”

And that was at a company that had been named to the Inc 500 for the second straight year.

The Information Society was supposed to replace the Industrial Society, and we all know how well that has worked. Very, very well for some, not so well for most. People didn’t find alternative employment so much as they were provided make-work jobs and kept in school for four to eight more years.

Now the Robotic Society is replacing the Information Society and the ability to disguise both the lack of employment and the lack of need of employment is rapidly vanishing. The fundamental falsity of increasingly outdated economics models are also becoming apparent; no conventional model can survive the near-complete replacement of labor with capital.

Wounded Gamma loses again

One significant characteristic of the Gamma male is that he cannot deal with being publicly shown to be wrong. Such an event punctures the delusion bubble in which he, the Secret King, always triumphs, so it creates a wound that never heals, and festers much longer than any higher-rank man can imagine. Even if he manages to control himself and not let it show immediately, it eats away at him and preys on his mind.

The way the Gamma usually deals with a festering wound is to attempt to negate it by subsequently demonstrating his superiority to the party who dealt it to him. This means that he will lie in wait, for years if need be, for what he sees as an opportunity to prove the offending party wrong. This, he believes, will disqualify and discredit the party, which somehow means that the Gamma was not wrong the first time, even though he was. But no matter, the Secret King triumphs in the end!

This behavior is so predictable that I not infrequently find myself able to correctly anticipate when a previously wounded Gamma is going to think he sees an opening and launch what I am coming to think of as a restorative rebuttal. However, I did not see this one coming; I did not think that Camestros Felapton was dumb enough to launch what is either his third or his fourth attempt to repair his delusion bubble since being so publicly humiliated about his lack of knowledge concerning rhetoric in Of Enthymemes and False Erudition. Apparently the sting of his repeated defeats at my hands has become more than he can bear, because he is really grasping at straws now.

The other day Vox was disparaging about the value of scientific evidence. I’m not entirely sure if he is clear himself about what he means but when it comes to IQ he is happy to post anything that he feels supports his case. This time, it is a pair of studies that point to a 4 point decline in IQ in France in a 9-10 year period. Vox quotes a second study that was an analysis of the first. This second study was an attempt to discern the cause of the decline by looking at the magnitude of the changes at a subtest level. This second paper concluded that the decline ‘likely has a primarily biological cause’. Vox declares it was due to immigration.

Did I now? What did I actually write? Let’s review:

My estimate of a post-1965 four-point IQ loss in the USA was a minimum estimate based solely on replacement migration, but considering that dysgenic fertility is also a factor in the USA, the actual decline is almost certainly worse.


If replacement migration is also the lesser factor in the US case, then the post-1965 IQ decline in the USA could be as much as 10 points. However, US immigration has been higher and US native birth rates have remained higher than in France, so something on the order of 7-8 points is more likely. This is not insignificant; it is the difference between the current USA and Sierra Leone.


So, Camestros is obviously wrong. I did not say the decline was due solely to immigration, I merely repeated what the study said, which is that the reported IQ decline in France was primarily due to dysgenic fertility and secondarily due to immigration.

Moreover, this shows that Camestros was not merely wrong, he was lying, because I even pointed out that while dysgenic fertility appears to have been the primary factor responsible in France, in the US it is more likely that immigration is nearly as important a factor for two reasons: US immigration rates are higher and US native birth rates are higher. There is a third reason as well; higher abortion rates among the lowest-IQ population tend to partially counterbalance the lower fertility rate of the highest-IQ population.

We had damn well better hope I am right, because we know the immigration-related decline of IQ in the USA is at least 4 points based on population averages. If the dysgenic fertility decline in the USA is, like France, even worse than the immigration-related decline, then we will have already seen a catastrophic decline in average US IQ of 9 points or more! In his desperation to declare me wrong about immigration and IQ, (and therefore retroactively wrong about Aristotle and rhetoric) Camestros fails to even notice the horrific implications of his argument. Who cares about that, what is important is to patch up that punctured delusion bubble stat!

Finally, after again trying to cast doubt on IQ as a reasonable metric for intelligence as well as upon the possibility of comparing average national intelligence levels, Camestros ends by saying, “neither paper ends up agreeing with Vox’s conclusion.”

Considering that neither paper addresses the USA at all, it would be absolutely remarkable if either of them had.

Once more, Camestros provides us with sufficient evidence to safely conclude that if IQ is a reasonable measure of innate intelligence, his is considerably lower than mine. It’s funny that despite being such a questionable metric, a similar percentile just seems to keep showing up no matter how it’s measured.

Of course, my actual vocabulary is probably more than twice that, but then, we’re not counting Italian, German, French, or Japanese vocabularies.

UPDATE: Gammas never learn. And they never stop lying.

Camestros Felapton ‏@CamestrosF
@voxday declares me beneath his consideration, again

Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
You’re lying, again. I take on all comers. Even hapless, midwitted gamma males like you.