Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Natalie Portman - Scientist

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–177 of 177 posts

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#171

Post by zavulon »

nicpottier wrote: post #162
zavulon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I scrolled all the way to the bottom of the comments, getting more and more depressed thinking as I'm the only old codger who remembers this meme. I am happy to find out I'm not the only one!

Ya, I did the same, and upvoted the comment when I saw it. Would love to see the battle of votes on that comment. But sheesh, isn't it ok to have a little fun now and then. I mean it is even kinda on topic. :)

I had exactly the same thought, and I upvoted it too! I thought my comment would get downvoted to oblivion as well, but I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling nostalgic. When the meme isn't even features on KnowYourMeme.com, you know it's old.

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#172

Post by rogercosseboom »

Dexter Holland, lead singer of the California Punk group The Offspring, was valedictorian at his High School has a BS and MS from USC, and is currently ABD for a PhD in Molecular Biology.

Additionally he has, not only his pilot's license, but his APTL license (which requires 1500 flight hours) and is a certified Flight Instructor who has made a round-the-world flight in 10 days.

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#173

Post by burgerbrain »

nicpottier wrote: post #162
zavulon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I scrolled all the way to the bottom of the comments, getting more and more depressed thinking as I'm the only old codger who remembers this meme. I am happy to find out I'm not the only one!

Ya, I did the same, and upvoted the comment when I saw it. Would love to see the battle of votes on that comment. But sheesh, isn't it ok to have a little fun now and then. I mean it is even kinda on topic. :)

Welp, it wouldn't be a hot grits comment if it didn't get modded into oblivion :P

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#174

Post by roel_v »

danssig wrote: post #157
roel_v wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yes, intelligence needs to be trained, shaped, refined. But are you saying that there is no difference between humans when it comes to their maximum potential? I think everybody has an 'intelligence ceiling', and that ceiling can only be asymptotically approaches by study, hard work, circumstances etc. But that doesn't take away from the (imo) fact that there is a ceiling and that some people, no matter what th…

I think the issue here is that you're saying "if person A is good at math person B may never be able to get as good at math". This I would agree with, but I think person B might be able to get better in some area than person A ever could. Equal in that sense, not identical.

Not necessarily. I don't see a reason why person B would have to have something he's better at than A, except maybe statistical - there are millions of things a person can be good at, so the chances he's worse than the other in all things are very small.

But then still, it's entirely possible that person A is better at many more things than person B. So 'equal' as in 'A and B are the best in an equal amount of things', I don't see any reason why it would be so.

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#175

Post by richcollins »

nostrademons wrote: post #148
richcollins wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that too until I moved to San Francisco and started meeting people that consistently see things that I miss. It wasn't that they had more domain knowledge or worked harder, it was that they were just better at seeing remotely connected things.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they're innately smarter than you. When I first moved out to Silicon Valley and started working at Google, I met lots of people that consistently saw things that I missed. Even ones who didn't have as much experience as I did, at least in terms of year-as-a-computer-programmer. Now that I've been here a couple years, I've found that I'm consistently seeing things that other people a…

I meant that you can put them in a place where they have no more domain knowledge than I do and they see meaningful connections between seemingly unconnected ideas that I miss. The people that I've met that are good at doing this are also highly creative (they appear to be related).

Re: Natalie Portman - Scientist

#177

Post by [deleted] »

jhamburger wrote: post #87
TheSOB88 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the reason people are 'smart' is because of the way their brain has organized itself over the years in response to learning so much? Then it isn't that dumb people are dumb, just behind.

That isn't reality. The genetic factors of intelligence are well documented. I could have played basketball six hours a day, every day for the last 25 years, and I'd be really really good. But I wouldn't be as good as Lebron James was when he was 12 years old.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN