The subtext of the story is insulting, and easily disproven: we're supposed to think that choice of browser somehow reflects on a person's intelligence. It is ridiculous that HN picked it up in the first place.
In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge? Oh, right: continue to judge people for their choice in a trivial matter.
The tech industry really needs to get over itself.
If it were true that stupid people prefer X, then yes: your preference for X would suggest that you were stupid. Preferring X, however, wouldn't _make_ you stupid if you weren't, just as your IQ won't leak out to 'fill the vacuum' were you to attend a Stupidity Convention.
It's just statistics; it's not black magic. Assertions about groups are not assertions about individuals, so don't just treat one as the other.
> In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge?
Sure it does. And since most smart people prefer eating over starving as well, that preference also suggests that you are smart. If you combine these suggestions with an assertion of excluded third, you can say that a preference for eating over starving implies a qualifiable intelligence.
That is to say, suggestion is not implication. I can reasonably suggest that you are stupid without it being the most reasonable suggestion.
Comments
However IE and IQ are connected, I can't get how this kind of articles are of interest to the Hacker News community.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mean any offense, it's only that I see this kind of "news" quite unworthy.
- "Cool guys wear Nike" - "Powerful men drive Mercedes" - "Independent women buy Prada"
etc..
The subtext of the story is insulting, and easily disproven: we're supposed to think that choice of browser somehow reflects on a person's intelligence. It is ridiculous that HN picked it up in the first place.
In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge? Oh, right: continue to judge people for their choice in a trivial matter.
The tech industry really needs to get over itself.
If it were true that stupid people prefer X, then yes: your preference for X would suggest that you were stupid. Preferring X, however, wouldn't _make_ you stupid if you weren't, just as your IQ won't leak out to 'fill the vacuum' were you to attend a Stupidity Convention.
It's just statistics; it's not black magic. Assertions about groups are not assertions about individuals, so don't just treat one as the other.
> In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge?
Advertise differently.
> Oh, right: continue to judge[!]
Falsehoods won't do anything to stop that.
> If it were true that stupid people prefer X, then yes: your preference for X would suggest that you were stupid.
This is not correct. Stupid people prefer eating over starving, but a preference for eating does not suggest that you are stupid.
Sure it does. And since most smart people prefer eating over starving as well, that preference also suggests that you are smart. If you combine these suggestions with an assertion of excluded third, you can say that a preference for eating over starving implies a qualifiable intelligence.
That is to say, suggestion is not implication. I can reasonably suggest that you are stupid without it being the most reasonable suggestion.
We also really need to get rid of IE. Especially IE6.