h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I just tried it, following a huge stodgy Chinese meal, and was reassured that my test scores have only dropped two points in the twenty years since I was last tested
(157 -> 155, since you asked)

I know they're here somewhere - but I can't find them.

J

I have found that overwhelmingly the people I interact with most are on the honest and understanding side. There's little to be gained by intentionally deceiving. Some people remain superficial, and that's fine. That happens in real life too. Those are the people that you say hello to when you pass by but don't really know that well.

As for conversations and getting off on tangents and such, it happens less when you do real-time chat. You don't have facial expressions or gestures, but you learn to adapt to not having them.

There are some advantages. People really are inclined to be more open, or at least more open sooner after first meeting. I'm not even sure of the dynamic there, as it certainly continues on long after the true anonymity is gone. But it's definitely there, has been the case with several people I've "talked" with.

The quite interesting thing that has happened in my personal experience is that a group of friends developed online, just as a group of friends can develop in real life. We have group conversations, express concern when someone hasn't been around for a while, talk about any general things that are going on with us or around us... these are all things that happen in real life. Even the risk of deceit goes down as any one person would have to be deceiving all the rest of us.

In fact, there are some aspects of this that couldn't happen in real life. We wouldn't be able to talk together because we're scattered all over the world. And yet with the net, we can transcend that sort of barrier. No, it doesn't take the place of real in-person contact, but it can't be regarded as second-rate either.

Final word in the IQ-means-nowt argument - Garry Bushell claims to have a high IQ. What does he do? Spout wildly inaccurate, misleading and profoundly stupid piffle about crap television for, of all things, The Sun.

Maybe the initial question should have been:

"Why do all maths prodigies have bowl haircuts?"

That kid the other week had one, even though it was blond. There was an entire family of them at my school. Carol Vorderman had one.

Genii being freaky isn't so much of a problem; the real problem arises when people who either consider themselves more intelligent than average or seek to have their IQ tested to 'prove' their advanced intelligence begin to suffer under the illusion that they are better than the unintelligent/uneducated masses. Instead of helping them in some way (as they should, humans being a social species) they mock them and keep their distance. Even DNA made some comment in his interview with the American Atheist Society that "…he doesn't often meet people who enjoy watching daytime soaps…" in the same way that he seldom met True Believers. Classing these people together isn't fair - True Believers have made a choice in Believing in the false god or ill-advised creed from which they suffer - there is an element of upbringing in it, the same as some of the people who digest TV like there's no tomorrow have been raised so to do - whereas some people, through no fault of their own (they didn't ask to be born) just don't have the wiring with which other 'lucky' people have been bestowed. There are too many different types of intelligence (spatial, musical, social, intellectual et al) to even contemplate, let alone rank in order of importance and grade numerically.
Anyway, this is digressing - the fact that genii can be mocked is in a way good, as it restores some of the balance between the extremes of applicable brainpower. The genius can mock the simpleton for taking part in the Free Deirdre campaign whilst the Springer-believer can mock the genius for not knowing in which brand of sportswear one must be seen. This becomes bad when it creates, maintains or encourages the divide between people on the grounds of intelligence. Whether it be on the grounds of colour, riches, musical taste, brainpower or sex there will always be some division between people on whatever basis they can identify even the slightest of variation.

Maybe genii are a little socially weird because they're a little too analytical of everything - rather than learning the guidelines for social interaction they question why they're there. This can sometimes be good, but everything can be taken to extremes.

I've been away Krissie, are there still stocks of Pez?

Well... Click in the left-hand frame (without selecting a post). If you're using IE, go to "Edit -> Find (on this page)", and do a search for "Now" down through the list. If that doesn't find a new post, try searching upward for "Minute", then downward for "Hour"...

One of those will find any post less than a day old

BTW, If you're using Netscape, I'm sure it has an in-page search too, but I don't know the details. Ditto Opera.

Oh yeah. Been there. In fact, most of the time I live there .

Yes! Tons of PEZ left! What would you like? Jerry Lewis PEZ? Early Attractive Elvis PEZ? Old Fat -n- Ugly Elvis PEZ?

Just let me know. I am the PEZ dispensor! ha ha. *wiping away a tear* get it?

The nuance of emotion can be carried in text, really, without the use of emoticons. Haven't you ever read a book? There are no smilies in books to let you know when the author is being facetious.

The quality of communication online between any pair or group of people relies on the competence of the people in question to interpret the medium; just as some people are better at interpreting body language than others, some people are better at reading and writing than others. I'm not saying that those who don't fully grasp the intensity of meaning in words written on the Net are less literate than others, but that they are less suited to the medium, just as most people aren't as apt at discerning minute changes in facial expressions as actors are.

But if two people who are good at writing what they mean talk together online, the exact meaning of every word is conveyed and understood.

The telephone works on the same principle. Though most people will agree that vocal communication limits expression, the advantages greatly outweigh the disadvantages of telephone conversations.

Internet chat has more than enough advantages to make up for the slight inconvenience that plain text might cause—and one of them is an increase in the literacy and comprehension of those who use it. This is making us smarter.

I don't know....I consider myself pretty good at writing what I mean, and yet very often on the Internet I find that I can't say something in the way I want to say it. Mostly this happens with sarcasm and irony; no matter how many ways I try phrasing something, I eventually have to give it up because I can't find a way to convey the ironic tone which in a face-to-face or telephone conversation would be effortlessly communicated by the sound of my voice. Instead, my statments wind up sounding sincere and thus insulting.

*nods* ... That's why so many internet 'groups' (of friends) have yearly conferences or something where everyone who can make it get together somewhere just to be together. And those that don't make it are filled in. I know this happens.

Irony and sarcasm can be sent in binary code. It's just tricky. I mean, I've seen it done quite effectively. It's a ton easier with smilies, naturally, and it's also a help when the discussion is between people who either know each other well really or have at least been talking online for a long time.

What's more, though, sometimes it's not that detrimental to the comedy of the situation to have your comment taken as sincere at first. You can do more with it that way.

But people don't trust you anymore after that.

Try clicking in the frame you want to search and hitting Ctrl+F

(1) not all geniuses are freaky
(2) they don't exsist they never evolved past the caveman stage

"They" are out there.
"They" have "the truth".

maybe so and if they are out there they are married

I thought I had two modes too: It took me years to discover all those friends I had in the local pubs weren't my friends because of my social skills but more because it's fun to have the local nutcase around. On the other hand I think I had an awfull lot of social skills when playing poker and giving them drinks of their own money. But I agree from kiddieschool on I learned not to answer questions in the classroom, not to express what interested me and hide in the background. Later I had to communicate with people, make social contacts, I really hated that. As I ain't so experienced in socialtalk I usually shut up in group conversations, I aint got a clue how people can talk about totally boring things for hours. Also they mostly don't know what I'm talking about. That's when they call you a freak. But don't go and tell me I've got to get therapy to learn social skills. Why should I become something I dont want to be?

I remember a somewhat bigger dilemma in early school ( grades 1 through 3 ), it's a hard choice between getting normal grades and fitting in, and being beaten by the teacher for getting less then A ( never equip. a late Edwardian teacher with IQ results ). As I tended to get A,s with little effort, and the rubberized canvas strap hurt alot , I took the path of least resistance, got A,s , and learned to mistrust and despise authority . So far I've little evidence that these weren't valuable lessons . Individuals can earn respect , but offices are empty facades unless filled by a respectable individual.
Genius as freaky , well to some extent , but I'd tend to put that down to novelty . In having to learn to make ones own entertainment , a person with any creativity will become distinct from the larger group that is satisfied to be handed thier entertainment. If the group is looking for a quick way to define itself , pointing out the different individual and excluding them doesn't take any effort.

Although I try at all times not to stereotype people, one fact about really clever people always holds true - They all appear to be too clever to comb thier hair.

As for the man thing - I'm sure there are one or two out there, but you'll have to look hard.

We just prefer the 'natural windblown' look.

*cough*