21–30 of 192 posts
Edit: Yay for the kid. He's awesome. I was trying to be clever about demonstrating how the journalist's selection among alternatives narratives influence our perception of reality, but it was too much wrongthink.
What the hell is this supposed to be?
Edit: Yay for the kid. He's awesome. I was trying to be clever about demonstrating how the journalist's selection among alternatives narratives influence our perception of reality, but it was too much wrongthink.
What the hell is this supposed to be?
It just comes across as churlish, though.
EDIT: Even the fact that the comment was edited from some stupid pseudocode, into something that cries "wrongthink" plays thusly...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> #27 in America for eight-year-olds The granularity of this ranking is interesting.
I disagree. This isn't a contrived category, which is common in tournaments, to make them interesting. On chess.com and Lichess there are chess tournaments that are restricted to people with lower than, say, a 1500 rating. If a 1700 chess player plays worse on purpose to get the score down, that's called sandbagging. There is little room for sandbagging here. People can't just change their ages, or up and move to the…
Was there an edit to the OP I missed? What are you disagreeing with exactly? It was clearly a statement of opinion about how they found it interesting.
You couldn't just elucidate more on the reasoning for the classifications, you had to first tell them they were wrong and then pedantically explain it.
Peak fucking HN commenting.
How can we, as a society, support our future during its most vulnerable time (childhood)? How is it possible that we still have homeless children in a country with so much wealth? (I'm seriously asking. I want to know how many other similarly bright minds aren't being supported to their full potential due to circumstances not their fault, and what public administrative techniques have been proven to work or not work…
The argument goes like this:
> Because why should I care for someone else's child and why should I shell out money because someone decided to have children even though they shouldn't have ?
In his age category.
I was a latch-key kid growing up and can clearly remember hopping on the train after class (with my free student pass) to Manhattan and killing some time at some of the best museums in the world (also free for students) and being exposed to so much.
We must continue to invest in our kids and in social infrastructure like transportation and libraries to spark the next generation.
Kudos to this kid, I just really hope he can make it through. There is unfortunately a huge disparity in what we can expect him to achieve because of his circumstances.
Edit: Yay for the kid. He's awesome. I was trying to be clever about demonstrating how the journalist's selection among alternatives narratives influence our perception of reality, but it was too much wrongthink.
https://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/06/16/the-failure-state-of-...
In his age category.
I think I was about 11 when I learned the game, and before long with no particular study I could beat most of my neighborhood peer group and some adults.
Then I actually went to my local middle school competition, was handed a series of decisive defeats, and learned there's a world of people who begin to make a serious study of it in childhood, same as there are serious students and even prodigies when it comes to musical instruments, and in that arena, I was nowhere near the top of the local pool.
Let alone a New York pool, where I suspect there are 8 year olds that could give many HN participants a run for their money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. This isn't a contrived category, which is common in tournaments, to make them interesting. On chess.com and Lichess there are chess tournaments that are restricted to people with lower than, say, a 1500 rating. If a 1700 chess player plays worse on purpose to get the score down, that's called sandbagging. There is little room for sandbagging here. People can't just change their ages, or up and move to the…
> I disagree. Was there an edit to the OP I missed? What are you disagreeing with exactly? It was clearly a statement of opinion about how they found it interesting. You couldn't just elucidate more on the reasoning for the classifications, you had to first tell them they were wrong and then pedantically explain it. Peak fucking HN commenting.