The thing I was thinking about this morning was in response to a Banned Hipster post.
Here’s a comment I left that’s awaiting moderation:
“If anything you’re understating the level of competition. My day job brings me into contact with the sort of white parents who are still trying to get their kid (singular) into Harvard. A 4.2 GPA with AP multivariable calc is just the beginning, you also have to be a world-traveling philanthropist like Greta and the captain of your AAA travel hockey team. Merely being on said hockey team costs 15k per season, not counting hotels, plane tickets, equipment, and your personal skills coach, skating coach, nutritionist, and strength coach. I’m not exaggerating, this is standard. You have to be a multimillionaire to begin with just to be in the running.”
A follow-on thought is that competition in a proxy measure activity always renders the proxy invalid over time.
I think there’s a named law for that somewhere.
Basically, when education became a way of virtue signaling intelligence it was doomed.
There’s got to be
Closest I can think of is campbell’s law
which is that the more important a particular metric or measurement is, the more likely it is to be rigged
That means the modern day Mandarin test (ivies admission) is on course to be replaced by something.
Not soon, but inevitably.
A follow-on thought to that is that dissident types should have their competing Mandarin test ready to go.
One of the big reasons universities still make money is there’s still no institutional replacement.
Sure, people can bloviate about self-taught plumbers reading Shakespeare, but when it comes time to hire a programmer the MIT name still carries weight.
Because you can’t escape the pre-selection game.
Women and employers use weakness-based hiring because it works, and pre-selection is the 80/20 that you ignore at your peril.
It’s all about avoiding lemons.
The MIT programmer might not actually be a hotshot, but he’s almost certainly not a lemon.
Which is good enough for most practical purposes. Not good enough to build something new, mind, but we’re talking about doing well enough to survive and reproduce here.
Follow-on thought to dissident types creating their own Mandarin tests: this is an area where purity spiraling could be put to constructive use.
Given a bit of direction, of course.
For example, let’s imagine we’re selecting the technocratic elite for the Alt-Right society.
If you make the test a bunch of trivia questions from Nazi books, you’re going to select people who are good at trivia and read a lot of Nazi books. Not the best choice.
And it pays to keep in mind that technocrats aren’t a leadership caste, they’re specialized professionals who serve as expert advisors to the political activist caste (as distinct from the demagogue caste, which the Alt-Right already has).
They are also basically project managers.
hence the inherent weakness of technocracy
you end up with a government of paperclip maximizers
all potential goals are subordinated to a singular metric
Yeah, in the sense that recently a few of them have made some money and gotten ahead of themselves.
Although I think there’s an extent to which they’re used as scapegoats for the predations of the classes above them.
Zuckerberg is more of a whipping boy than an intelligence agency in his own right.
Easy to hate, and he doesn’t mind it, so everybody wins.
it’s not that these people don’t have power, in some sense, but it’s all relative
I’m thinking of this old post: https://aeolipera.wordpress.com/2017/06/10/on-guilds/
and there’s always a bigger fish or a more competent palyer of games
Where the reason that most cultures don’t have continuity is they don’t have these centers of institutional knowledge transfer.
A monk and a technocrat are basically the same thing.
Or you might say a monk and a master lens grinder.
Word of mouth isn’t the worst way to select a monk or a lens grinder, but it’s no Mandarin test.
“I have a bright nephew” vs. “I have a nephew who’s a PhD student at MIT.”
As iSteve points out, IQ tests are useful but not as useful as AP tests.
the advantage of a mandarin test is an absoulte standard
That said, it also depends a lot on whether you’re looking for technocrats or autistic geniuses.
“i have a right nephew” is a statement relative toour dunbar number
Right, you might get a little past the baseline social organization level but not a lot.
MIT is a relative to the entire pool of smart people in the conutry
technocrats versus autistic geniuses is a good distinction
Technocrats will be overwhelmingly male head girls, there’s no getting around that.
the projct managers versus the artists
If we’re going to come up with an example such test, we should think of a concrete use case.
Where’s an area where you’d like to have an existing dissident specialist class?
I have one: I’d like there to be a class of electric power engineers who specialize in applications for getting off the grid.
They have to be trustworthy and not full of shit.
I don’t want to be like Germany where we all go green and then freeze in the winter because the math didn’t match reality.
architecture comes to mind, but the food industry would have a bigger impact
What sort of architecture? Aesthetic?
I want my electrical engineers to be libertarian because I don’t want them to be naive plan trusters about the grid through normalcy bias. Extreme lefties won’t work because they’ll be green energy plan trusters.
Medicine is probably a better one to knock out early.
yeah, more aesthetic
Sounds like luxury talking to me.
hence why i’d pick food and medicine first