reddit General

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Redditors are introduced to the water level test. You are shown a drawing of a glass with the water level marked on it. Then you are shown a drawing of a tilted glass. You have to mark the water level. Simple, right? It's literally a test for young children.

1000026176.webp
https://www.reddit.com/r/evopsych/comments/lm5rdv/40_of_college_women_fail_the_piaget_waterlevel/
firefox_tmF9fBbyNa.webp
kek

firefox_sZpxNNvJX4.webp
firefox_MTcQm8x5D8.webp
tranny wall of text
 
I know a similar study was run in a university to test ai detection in course work. A big problem universities are having is distinguishing student work that has been AI generated when marked.

Across three year groups (first, second, third) they generated work for three different pieces of course work for each year. They literally took the question, copy and pasted it into chatgpt and submitted the results as course work with none of the markers knowledge. None of the AI work was flagged for academic offence, while some normal actual student work was. No one could tell the AI work apart from student work. And the AI work consistently received at 65%.

Edit. Grammar
 
Last edited:
How does a person delude themselves into thinking being attracted to males/male features is somehow not an attraction to men? I'm sorry, but just because a person is comfortable in their sexuality doesnt mean they're right about their sexuality.
Do check how scrotes fare on the card-turning test (AB12). Also this:
View attachment 7292818

I wrote about the water test several times in the context of fake universality of IQ tests. People untrained to do IQ tests, such as latchkey children and savages, don't understand the language of the tests, they don't know what kinds of differences/relations there might be and what possibilities to try. Savages specifically don't know what page numbers and task numbers are for, they think an ordinal number or a frame around the task is a component of the task. This doesn't mean that, when the test shows IQ50, they're lichrally retarded like first-world IQ50s ("low IQ" savages are capable of living in their environment), but it does mean they're unsuited for the globohomo world. You decide how suitability for the globohomo world of Humans of Flat reflects on a person's character.

IQ researchers increasingly think that geometric IQ tests are gay and tests should have a language component. Exams in the conservative movement of classical education use extensive language tests. This makes them less suitable to demean savages, more human, and incidentally women ace them, because women are human, and men are gay.

And yes, of course the water test only indicates the ablity of the test-taker to do gay globohomo tests. People (women, savages, even filthy scrotes) understand how water works. If you were to test for a correlation between failing the water test and not knowing how IRL water works, there wouldn't be any, because gay tests are gay and only test for how gay you are.
Ma'am this is not the DMZ and you are too stupid to understand there is no test of IQ more accurate than language comprehension.
 
>Muh Water
>Muh Lectrishity

In the good name of God, shut the holy fuck up.

These kinds of people NEVER cared about environmentalism, electricity, or water conservation until MUH AI. Then overnight they became the Captain Planet scold task force. God this genre of redditor really pisses me off. They really make me MATI!
The funniest thing is that they write it on the Internet. From a computer or phone that consumes electricity. To a website whose data center consumes a shitload of electricity and water. With a network infrastructure that also consumes electricity. It's like a vegan would kill a herd of cows and use their dead bodies to lay a “stop killing animals” text on the ground.
 
Redditors are introduced to the water level test. You are shown a drawing of a glass with the water level marked on it. Then you are shown a drawing of a tilted glass. You have to mark the water level. Simple, right? It's literally a test for young children.

View attachment 7290101
As expected from the once in a generation geniuses that redditors (believe they) are, the top comments are full of cope about how the test is stupid and failing it actually means you're just too smart to know how water works.

View attachment 7290100

This high IQ redditor took a very real IQ test where he noticed a statistical anomaly that the writers didn't. He's so smart he got it wrong! That's what's going on here! Never mind the fact that "draw a line where the water level would be" is as clear and unambiguous as it gets.

View attachment 7290118

See? Another person is sure it's because of ambiguous wording. They just asked "where the line would be"! That's ambiguous!

Except, again, the question uses the term "water level", which means exactly one thing. Too smart to be fooled by bad wording, and also too smart to read the introductory paragraph of the article and learn what the wording actually was. That's a whole lot of smart.

One redditor wonders why women are so bad at this test.

View attachment 7290121

There is only one possible explanation: women are too smart to get it right.

View attachment 7290120
View attachment 7290119
View attachment 7290117

Or, alternatively, those horrible sexist men forced them to choose the wrong answer. By being sexist.

View attachment 7290116

Whatever the answer, one thing is for sure: redditors are never wrong. Not ever.
do you have a link to this? i think it got nuked and i watned to read it :'(
 
Does water not adhere to itself?
That's called cohesion which is the attractive force between molecules of the same type. Water is very cohesive due to the hydrogen and oxygen bonds. Each oxygen has 2 sets of free electrons on the opposite side of the hydrogen bonds. The Oxygen atom has a higher affinity towards all electrons in the water molecule which pulls the electrons from the hydrogens closer to it. This causes water to have polarity where the oxygen is slightly negative and the hydrogens are slightly positive thus attracting other water molecules nearby to it. This is why water can form raindrops as it has a high surface tension.

Like I said before I was being very pedantic and I was giving the academic definition of wetness. Which is a liquid adhering to another surface, not itself.
 
Damn you you beat me to it.

This just proves what everyone already knew: reddit is very gullible and should never be taken seriously with anything. They are easily manipulated sheeple, barely human

And then kek at the mods "we would like an apology, and not to post your study, you broke our rules and showed we're complete gullible morons" and the researchers in a way of 5000 words I ain't reading, basically says "no get fucked"
What killed me was the way they approached this information. Instead of “welp, this is an interesting precedent, maybe it's time we learn to think critically” they went into full on ree mode.
At least these guys are publishing the results. Governments and big companies doing the same won't.
 
This is actually pretty worrisome. Just imagine the sheer amount of retards incapable of forming a single independent thought for this study to be as impactful as it was. Social media is basically a form of very insidious psychological warfare and it will get worse as time goes by with education getting worse and worse. Keep in mind, education nowadays is especifically designed to make you as receptive to information as possible without the capability of processing it in a critical way.
 
Group 1: the normal people with ADD/Autism. They might act a little weird at times, or you might not notice it at all. Maybe they can't look you in the eye or some shit, but overall, they are very well adjusted, can fend for themselves, can do everything a regular person can, and have normal human interests like sports or movies, often times really good at one or two skills (construction, forming mental images for painting, etc). In other words, they can fit into society no problem. around 60 percent of the autistic spectrum are these people. You could argue their level 1 autistic by the DSM-5, but i'd argue there's only 2 levels that way, No support and Support needed.
I've met people who are level 1 but clearly have problems that do/will effect them in the long run It's usually nothing major but it's usually just poor social skills (that you don't even notice unless you have a conversation with them), being only able to really work in one specific field or having a deficiency with something (like not being able to estimate time).

It's more like going from a level 1 to a level 1.5. You have the people with no outward issues and then you have the people with outward issues that are still quite functional despite them.
I know a similar study was run in a university to test ai detection in course work. I big problem universities are having is distinguishing student work that has been AI generated when marked.
I browse /r/professors sometimes (just because the stories about students on there are funny even if I'm convinced most of them are ersatz and homosexual). A lot of the posts on there now are about students getting lazy and using AI. Obviously there are times when this is completely detectable, especially when they don't remove the "sure! here's X" ChatGPT likes to put at the start of messages (or when the writing style doesn't match the writing style that the student has on other assignments). But with how good LLM's are getting I have to wonder how many of the professors on there (or just in general) have either false-flagged something that wasn't ai generated as ai generated or vice versa. You can also mask AI work pretty easily by just editing what chatGPT spits out
 
AI aside, I'm just surprised it was so easy to change opinions, I figured most people just dug their heels in,. especially Reddit retards.
Redditors are the people with the least political and moral conviction or critical thinking skills

They don't dig their heels in about anything, you need to literally be wealthy and say something is good or bad, and that's what they go with

They literally think kamala harris is black and supported Hillary despite her klan connections and covering for Bill raping interns, backed by dna evidence no less. But I guess they don't wanna trust the science when it uncovers their wrong doing
 
Last edited:
But with how good LLM's are getting I have to wonder how many of the professors on there (or just in general) have either false-flagged something that wasn't ai generated as ai generated or vice versa.

These professors and especially public school “youths” teachers are old enough to have used Sparknotes and Wolfram Alpha to cheat. If you’re smart enough to cheat, you’re smart enough to get a fake degree, or lie in a job interview.
 
The funniest thing is that they write it on the Internet. From a computer or phone that consumes electricity. To a website whose data center consumes a shitload of electricity and water. With a network infrastructure that also consumes electricity. It's like a vegan would kill a herd of cows and use their dead bodies to lay a “stop killing animals” text on the ground.
Every time an environmentalist screeches about “muh carbon footprint”, tell them to go to India or China and preach there. Just see how they react.
 
Your point is invalid; LLMs aren't allowed to say slurs
some of them find ways of working around the filters and it always is interesting seeing chatbots that aren't allowed to say nigger still manage to say nigger. But yeah they're not the best at doing serious shit which the over-application to serious uses is going to end very badly if it keeps up.
 
I've met people who are level 1 but clearly have problems that do/will effect them in the long run It's usually nothing major but it's usually just poor social skills (that you don't even notice unless you have a conversation with them), being only able to really work in one specific field or having a deficiency with something (like not being able to estimate time).

It's more like going from a level 1 to a level 1.5. You have the people with no outward issues and then you have the people with outward issues that are still quite functional despite them.
that's why I kinda leaned that into level 2. you do make a valid point, though.
 
or lie in a job interview.
you should do that though, fuck goldstein for hiring a retarded HR firm that has no knowledge of the fields they supposedly hire for.
like asking for a 15 year experience in node.js for a programmer position, node.js is currently 13 years old...
Every time an environmentalist screeches about “muh carbon footprint”, tell them to go to India or China and preach there. Just see how they react.
they get uppity and tell you about YOUR carbon footprint, really funny seeing them get uppity.
 
@A Bit Concerning phone fag so can't quote for some reason.

So one thing the AI is very bad at (but it is getting better) is citations and references. It makes them up so it's a dead give away if a bunch of references don't exist. Most of the time we don't even flag suspected AI work because it is very difdicult to prove anyway. It's easier just to lower the grade we would have given. With that said if you are marking something in your area of expertise it is obvious it is AI generated. On the surface it all looks fine but some of the details are just off and the details that are off is only something that can come from the AI trying to interpret differing results. For example, you have two studie that have contradictory results, the AI will try and smash what these results imply together instead of just stating "here are two differing results. One implies this, the other implies that". It also somtimes fucks up the interpretations of statistical output that is obvious to a person (or should be) who has or is studying.

Edit. Grammar
 
Back
Top Bottom