Absolutely, but it's still useful. Allegedly Alfred Binet did not approve of the eventual applications of the test he designed.
spikespaz
joined 1 year ago
I don't know, when I got tested it seemed like they were testing the right stuff.
I'm pretty sure it's a well-made test that provides fairly accurate results. Even if what they claim to be measuring in each category isn't reflected in the test, it is, at the very least measuring the abilities required to take the test and that exactly.
It seems pretty straightforward to see how good a kid is at solving a puzzle, right?
If you took a test as a child, it was probably WISC-V.
This assessment provides the following scores:
- A Composite Score that represents a child's overall intellectual ability (FSIQ)
- Primary Index Scores that measure the following areas of cognitive functioning: Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Visual Spatial Index (VSI), Fluid Reasoning Index (FRI), Working Memory Index (WMI), and the Processing Speed Index (PSI).
- Ancillary Index Scores are also provided: The Quantitative Reasoning Index (QRI) ; Auditory Working Memory Index (AWMI); Nonverbal Index (NVI); General Ability Index (GAI); and the Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI).
Which seems very reasonable to me. This was originally intended to be an aptitude test, not strictly to measure your intelligence.
Unfortunately I got it at a thrift shop and there are no stickers. Googling for "pulley lamp" shows me one that looks very similar: "Carbon Loft Tirith Industrial Farmhouse Table Lamp with Pulley System"
You did get me there.
On the other hand, you can make identification difficult.
Use a root app that disables all network hardware while the device is locked, and randomize your MAC on public networks. Also use a carrier (if available) that purports to be ethical.
There are various issues with my statements: your SIM identifies you, there are ways to identify people across different networks even if their MAC is randomized, and even "ethical" carriers still use towers from other providers, which can of course triangulate your position.
That said though, if you take the proper precautions using a smart phone would be no worse than a flip phone.
What am I?
Actual, undeniable issues? Sure! However, and you may have heard this before, a tool is just a tool. Technology is neither good nor bad--it depends entirely upon how you use it.
Demonstrably inferior? This is simply and objectively untrue. They are not inferior in any ways whatsoever. How healthy they are, for the user, is not the only metric to consider. There is also the productivity side.
They make phone calls, they make texts, and then on top of the basics, you have access to much of mankind's collective knowledge catalogued at your fingertips. Whether or not that knowledge is actually correct is a judgment call. Whether or not you use your phone for video games, YouTube shorts, TikTok, and porn, is up to the individual user, and is indicative of the lifestyle that they choose to live. It has nothing to do with the tool that was put in their hands, and much more to do with the morality of the companies that serve the content that provides them gratification--and the ability of the individual to resist temptation.
As for tracking, if you are reasonably educated about the technology that you use on a daily basis, it is easy to circumvent the tracking and spying that happens. An example of this would be Calyx OS. Yes, you'll be putting in more maintenance, but do you do your own car repairs? Maybe it's time to advocate for ourselves and make an industry of privacy conscious smartphones.
Addendum: As for mobile UI, yes, it sucks, and companies keep hiring terrible developers that use the wrong tools for the job. That's what happens when you're mostly focused on your bottom line and don't want to pay for the skill that is actually required to make decent software.
Incorrect
Seriously lemmy disappoints me.
Dude that's a generalization and is just not true.