Nothing. I was just using an example of which I had some familiarity. In the context of this hypothetical thread, it is interesting to note that there is apparently some scientific data suggesting that Asians have a slightly higher IQ than other races. Not being an expert I can't readily provide the references. The other reason for using Silicon Valley as an example is that the theoretical we are discussing requires a survivor population that has a higher IQ density than the average population. The larger the sampling the closer the IQ density approaches average. Although I guess the argument would still hold for a city or country. I was just thinking that the difference in IQ density between Silicon Vally and California as a whole might be 20 points while the difference between China and the US might be 2 points.
I was thinking "catastrophe" as in a wipe out the dinosaurs asteroid hit or a global pandemic that takes out 95% of the population (think Ebola)or an EMP event that results civilization collapse, etc. So if Silicon Valley residents are the only survivors (god help us :-)and there is a higher IQ density there than other locations and if IQ is really significantly genetic, then the average IQ of humans has increased and can be maintained in the population. Other pockets of survivors would have an IQ density similar to that present in the general population existing before the catastrophe and based on our hypothetical case, lower than that in Silicon Valley. It is the geographic isolation and geographic concentration of a particular genetic trait that makes this type of selection possible.
It does not seem hard for me to contemplate the possibility that modern humans are primarily defined by our intelligence and that our closest relatives had less of it. Of course, as you point out, these developments occur over the course of perhaps hundreds of thousands of generations.It also seems pretty clear that catastrophes that dramatically reduce population sizes may also play a significant role in the process. Survivors of a catastrophe are likely to be geographically localized. The catastrophe eliminates gene pools and, by chance, selects for small subsets of the previously existing pool. Wash, rinse, repeat. And in a cosmic heartbeat....you have something different than what you started with.
Interestingly, the current mating and segregation trends, to the extent they exist, appear to be completely "natural" and lacking in premeditation. Can't help but wonder if modern humans are not the result of a process that left the Neanderthals ( pre-modern humans, whoever they were) behind. I'm no expert, but I don't think a complete lack of gene flow between groups is thought to be required for the process of speciation.
I first saw this concept in the context of intelligence in "The Bell Curve" by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray (1996). They suggested the process is accelerating dramatically with development of situations that make it easier for intelligent people to find each other: the movement of the population from the farm to cities, higher education, improved communications and less restricted travel. I would not be surprised if online dating sites are also playing a role. Once you start thinking about this in the context of genetics, matings and the potential for a survival advantage and increased quality of life leading to further segregation you wonder if this does not have the potential to eventually result in the development of a new species?! I would be interesting to know if the IQ "density" is significantly altered in certain communities in northern California, Boston, NY, etc. associated with industries selecting for high IQ workers.
[Edit]Just amused myself thinking of the Silicon Valley crew as participants in a breeding experiment.
Me: Do you have more hair on your head or on your eyelash?
Goostman: If I say that I haven't more hair on my head or on my eye lash - will it satisfy your inquisitive mind? By the way, what's your occupation? I mean - could you tell me about your work?
This is not passing the Turing test by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm willing to be convinced that Germany dominates in innovation but that would require a definition of 'innovation' and some data. Until then, count me skeptical.
The scanning electron micrograph conveys little information while the chemical structures would have been interesting even to amateur chemists. When new science is inaccessible to citizens that don't want to pay for it twice it should be the minimum responsibility of the scientific press to report the key findings.In chemistry, that means structures.
If a persons fully realized talents, skills, creativity and intelligence are such that the most useful work they can do generates productivity levels below those of generally available robots then they will be displaced.
If the maximum work complexity a person can handle is assembling hamburgers, washing dishes, moping floors, sticking one part onto another part then they are in danger of being permanently displaced by robots from ALL job categories.
I don't know how many people this is but as robots improve this number grows. How large would this number have to be, when added to current chronic levels of high unemployment, disability, nonproductive elderly/young, before society breaks down. And if by some chance society did not collapse what would all these people be doing? The mind rapidly slides into what we have previously considered dystopian science fiction.
It seems like these cars will have to be operable in both the manual and self driving modes. Otherwise the car will become much less flexible.
Examples:
1) immediate unplanned stop at a yard sale
2) drive "off road" to get around an obstruction
3) dealing with unstructured parking situations
4) avoiding emergency stops in unsafe locations
5) driving through puddles (is it 2 inches or 2 feet deep?)
6) etc.
And for some significant transition period the road will be populated by both manual and computer driven cars.
How does the hybrid system work? Won't many people take advantage of "dumb" cars. How would you drive if you knew many cars were computer controlled. Would people figure out how to "game" the known computer driving rules? I don't pull out in front of cars that are too close because the human might not stop and hit me. Maybe I don't worry about it if I know the computer is in control of the other car.
Long haul freeway driving does not seem too complicated. But what about high density suburban and city driving?
Again, friendly advice. This attitude guarantees that you will lose all your money. If not shorting TWTR then on the next deal. If the money is burning a hole in your pocket then give it to a worthy charity. If you are interested in the stock market then you need to read some books, discover a trading style that matches your personality and life situation, learn capital management, watch price movement until nothing surprises you and most important of all, overcome your psychological money demons (EVERYONE has them).
I think the definition of bold may be what is causing the disconnect. The two things I saw on the website that stood out were reduced class sizes and the reinstatement of cancelled programs. I can see how this benefits teachers, but am not sure how this improves reading, math and reasoning skills and increases the number of kids that are job/college ready.
All three "hacks" mentioned appear to involve spending more money. Unless the money is spent differently than it currently is, I don't see how this changes anything from the students perspective.
What I took from this story was a first hand account of resistance to change. This does not bode well for the ability of specific academic departments to maintain relevance in the years ahead.
Experimentation in the best ways to educate has been embraced by the private sector. It will be interesting to watch the level of competition that universities can provide.