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

U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

military.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 280 posts

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#141

Post by [deleted] »

dmurray wrote: post #134
nindalf wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That standardised test administered by the US military has some history. The idea was that folks who were below an 85IQ would be harder to train. During the Vietnam war they tried abandoning the requirement and the results were sad. It cost the military a lot more in remedial training, but the real tragedy is that these folks died at 3 times the rate of people who would have passed the test. They weren’t cut out to b…

85 IQ really isn't that low. It's one standard deviation below average, so about 16% of people are below that. In your average high school class of 30 people, the 4 stupidest would be rejected by the military on these grounds (assume the bottom 1/31 have such severe developmental difficulties they can't even attend a normal high school). Doesn't that seem like quite a high bar?

[deleted]

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#142

Post by [deleted] »

roenxi wrote: post #116
hayst4ck wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neutrality is support for might makes right. Choosing to be neutral is to say that the strongest party should win. Not being prepared to be violent makes you harmless. Having the capacity for violence and choosing not to use it makes you peaceful. If you speak softly, but don't carry a big stick, then you are just speaking softly. Might might not make right, but it determines who gets to make the rules.

> Neutrality is support for might makes right. Choosing to be neutral is to say that the strongest party should win. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Are you saying that the US has historically been taking a neutral position? I suppose they haven't been prosecuting any particular vision with their pointless wars, but that seems a bit weird. But no question not having any power to back up their whims will defang…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#143

Post by PeterStuer »

klipklop wrote: post #24

A bit of sensationalism going on. They still have to pass a standardize test that mostly proves they have an IQ suitable for military service. There are people that could be a great soldier/servicemember that didn’t make it through high school. Some will flourish under a military environment that failed out of high school. I don’t really like people assuming somebody that didn’t graduate high school are somehow infer…

Back in the day my country still had obligatory military service for the oldest male child of the family. Everyone had to do this. IQ tests were used to sort people coming in.

The military does not only need highly functioning autonomous operators. There were many more menial positions in cleaning, catering, hauling and warm body canon fodder than there were scouts or special forces.

I guess these days many of those auxiliary functions are farmed out in very lucrative deals to select private companies.

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#144

Post by mdhb »

klipklop wrote: post #24

A bit of sensationalism going on. They still have to pass a standardize test that mostly proves they have an IQ suitable for military service. There are people that could be a great soldier/servicemember that didn’t make it through high school. Some will flourish under a military environment that failed out of high school. I don’t really like people assuming somebody that didn’t graduate high school are somehow infer…

Not only are you correct here but the personality type you are describing is actually a quite common one in that environment.

People who did terribly in the context of a class rooom but thrive in the military in very complicated roles.

This recent interview with the commander of Delta Force comes to mind for me but what you’re describing is not rare. It cuts both ways like any organisation, there’s plenty of people who don’t thrive there as well but I’m not upset about this change at all, I think it’s sensible overall.

https://www.youtube.com/live/d_mI3XxiNec

You can listen to that person for just 5 minutes and see exactly what I’m referring to

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#145

Post by Magridal »

Gud wrote: post #138
nindalf wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That standardised test administered by the US military has some history. The idea was that folks who were below an 85IQ would be harder to train. During the Vietnam war they tried abandoning the requirement and the results were sad. It cost the military a lot more in remedial training, but the real tragedy is that these folks died at 3 times the rate of people who would have passed the test. They weren’t cut out to b…

A friend of mine I met while serving in Afghanistan, He was working for the Department of Agriculture, trying to get the Afghan farmers to grow saffron instead of poppy. He was a professor in agronomy and would help his students back home in the US with their assignments. He had signed up for the US army and ended up serving in the Special Forces in Vietnam for 2 years. He dropped out of school when he was 13. In my…

You are making an assumption that a person dropping out of school at 13 in the ~1960s would have the same education level as someone dropping out of school at 13 today, let alone that the conditions and circumstances one would find themselves in having dropped out are equivalent to the 1960s. Frankly, especially with the crumbling and cracking discipline, order, and hierarchy in the U.S. military now, you are also making an assumption that they would gain the benefits you surely assume based on a historical perception.

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#146

Post by Magridal »

dmurray wrote: post #134
nindalf wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That standardised test administered by the US military has some history. The idea was that folks who were below an 85IQ would be harder to train. During the Vietnam war they tried abandoning the requirement and the results were sad. It cost the military a lot more in remedial training, but the real tragedy is that these folks died at 3 times the rate of people who would have passed the test. They weren’t cut out to b…

85 IQ really isn't that low. It's one standard deviation below average, so about 16% of people are below that. In your average high school class of 30 people, the 4 stupidest would be rejected by the military on these grounds (assume the bottom 1/31 have such severe developmental difficulties they can't even attend a normal high school). Doesn't that seem like quite a high bar?

You’re overlooking a hidden pernicious effect, that IQ is a relative measure that does not identify a declining trend very effectively, i.e., any identified decline in IQ is both a momentary and transient indicator as the norm, i.e., 100 IQ, integrated; and the 100 IQ norm also does not say anything about the overall relative state to any other previous state.

In other words, this is how we end up with Idiocracy where a low IQ person becomes the smartest person in the world right under everyone’s nose.

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#148

Post by paganel »

riffraff wrote: post #78
atmavatar wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a little worried that if we implement the "service guarantees citizenship" scheme you allude to, we'll be forced to fight a war against an interstellar insect race soon after.

I giggled at this, but in starship troopers you'd not inherit citizenship. OP's proposal seem more like what the Roman empire did granting citizenship to conscripted barbarians, which worked or not depending on your perspective.

It worked until it didn't, and when it didn't anymore the failure was spectacular.

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#149

Post by paganel »

hayst4ck wrote: post #63
unnamed76ri wrote: post #4

Less people being willing to go fight and die in pointless wars is at least a small positive sign for society.

Neutrality is support for might makes right. Choosing to be neutral is to say that the strongest party should win. Not being prepared to be violent makes you harmless. Having the capacity for violence and choosing not to use it makes you peaceful. If you speak softly, but don't carry a big stick, then you are just speaking softly. Might might not make right, but it determines who gets to make the rules.

> Choosing to be neutral is to say that the strongest party should win.

In a war the strongest party also usually wins, so it's totally rational to not incur the opportunity costs of risking one's life by joining a war.

Re: U.S. army drops requirement for high school diploma (2022)

#150

Post by jdksmdbtbdnmsm »

ThisIsMyAltAcct wrote: post #32
jdksmdbtbdnmsm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another article is more explicit about exactly who isn’t joining the military anymore. The article doesn't confirm whether the total of any other groups is dropping, but it can be inferred from the numbers given that recruiting is very low across the board. It's worth having a racial remark in the title for clicks alone.

> In 2018, 56.4% of new recruits were categorized as white. In 2023, that number had fallen to 44%. During that same five-year period, Black recruits have gone from 20% to 24% of the pool, and Hispanic recruits have risen from 17% to 24%, with both groups seeing largely flat recruiting totals but increasing as a percentage of incoming soldiers as white recruiting has fallen.

The use of proportions rather than actual totals means the number of recruits could have dropped by that same 12.4% in every category, in which case the focus on race is completely meaningless.
Post reply on HN