Sten Sootla

@ylecun The premise of the argument is false. I don't feel threatened leading machines smarter than myself. I feel threatened by *others* leading machines smarter than me. A political leader is not threatened by his staff, but by other leaders with better staff.

Most people have no problem leading groups of people who are smarter than themselves. Political, business, & military leaders have staff & advisors who are often smarter individually or collectively. Why would people feel threatened leading machines that are smarter than them?

@GergelyOrosz Here's the article (and the references therein) on which I'm basing my arguments on: qualified.io/blog/posts/tru…

@sootla_sten It’s false advertising. Say you need high IQ test scores to work at this startup. I had friends who were smart & certainly got things done and applied to this hyped startup. Before talking to an engineer, or showcasing how the get things done, got rejected via the IQ test.

Hip startup on their jobs page: “You only need one degree here. It’s a degree of Getting Shit Done.” Same startup: “As the first step for your software engineering application, you need to take an IQ test.” In case you’re wondering: this is a sure sign to stay away.

@GergelyOrosz You provided anecdotal examples of false negatives - but that's not sufficient to argue that IQ tests provide less of a signal for one's ability to "get things done" than "talking to an engineer." Unstructured interviews have false negatives, too - research says even more so.