megaplayboy

No, I'm aware of the limited utility of IQ tests, the shady historical ties between IQ testing and the eugenics movement, and so forth.  My question was more along the lines of where these extraordinarily high scores are coming from when the standard tests don't really warranty any validity beyond maybe a 180 at most.  Elsewhere I've seen that a 200 is the highest score hypothetically possible, since exactly one person in the entire global population would have that score.  My impression is that there is nobody with an adult score in the 200 plus range, using any of the 6 or 7 standard tests used.  But if I'm wrong, I assume someone out there might be able to tell me.

So, from what I've read about most of the standard IQ tests, they don't certify accuracy beyond about 4 standard deviations, i.e., around about 160 IQ.  One did say his test wasn't valid or accurate beyond about a 175 IQ.  

So, my question is, where are all these IQ scores above 180 or so coming from?  What test did these individuals take to "certify" their IQ is, say, 225?  And are any of these scores achieved by these individuals as adults?

Prince George's County in Maryland has about 11k cases and 400 deaths, out of a population of around 900k.  While most of the state has begun the phased reopening process, the county remains under a stay at home order until June 1st.  Considering the number of people I see walking around without masks, I think that's the right call right now.  I do worry that once the lockdown begins to lift around the country, that more and more people will get lax and sloppy about hand washing, social distancing and mask wearing.  And the rates will spike and so will the death rates.  I hope I'm wrong but worry that I'm right about that.  

5 hours ago, DShomshak said:

 

Long overdue but unlikely to happen, even discounting that Trump finds them useful. Back in the Obama administration -- I think it was during the Bundy Ranch standoff -- I heard that the FBI has a policy of never going after these far-right extremists for fear of provoking a worse, more violent backlash. They call it "Weaver fever": Many believe the Ruby Ridge standoff against Randy Weaver, followed by the Branch Davidian standoff, led to the Oklahoma City bombing.

 

Now, I think coddling the fringe in this way only encourages them: It looks weak: Their anger feeds on itself, while perceived weakness increases contempt and confidence that they can get away with violent acts. So we might as well have it out and deal with any resulting insurrection, because -- as the Anti-Defamation League essay A Dark and Constant Rage points out -- this political poison has been around for decades. It isn't going away on its own.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

 

Yeah, I think that was a huge mistake.  If they fight back hard, come back at them 3x harder.  If posting to Daily Stormer and "protesting" while carrying an AR gets you put on an FBI watchlist, maybe fewer people will be inclined to do that sort of thing.  

21 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

This is the action of a small fringe of the Michigan populace -- polls show the majority support Whitmer's lockdown measures. But the current political climate is tolerating this kind of activity, and Donald Trump is actually fueling it with his "Liberate Michigan" tweets. Four years ago every level and branch of government would have condemned such expressed sentiments in the harshest terms, and the people running the websites encouraging such violence would have had their asses dragged into court for inciting hatred and armed insurrection.

A crackdown on the various flavors of armed nutjobs out there--white supremacists, sovereign citizens, various militias--is long overdue.  Put a federal/state/local task force on it and shut them all down.  Run them to ground.  It's gone beyond tiresome and ventured into the real of the frightening and threatening.

On 5/10/2020 at 8:10 PM, Sundog said:

Yes. Only the Romans used a sword as their primary military arm - and even then, not for all of their soldiers. The all time winner in that stake has pretty much always been some variation of the spear.

A spear and shield, with a couple similarly armed comrades by your side, sounds like a pretty good melee option in a starship corridor.  You just walk the other guys back until you can impale them.  If they get too close, someone brings the sword out.  

14 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:

 

<eeyore>I wonder if viable treatments derived from these experiments will be exclusive to the most affluent among us.</eeyore>

Possibly.  But generally economies of scale and expiration of patent periods tend to mean that eventually treatments would become affordable to the masses.  

From a gaming standpoint, one could have an Everyman extended lifespan, 1 point(200 years or so), and then have Age: 80+ and Age: 120+ as viable complications.  It would also explain why everyone looks the same age in comic book universes, even when characters have been around 60+ years.  

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.07.082917v1

Summary: injection of blood plasma from young rats into old rats leads to substantial reversal of effects of aging.  

Obviously it's early and the results need to be reproduced, but I expect this may the first of many such breakthroughs along the path to real lifespan extension.  It's hard to conceive of something that would transform society more than both extended longevity and extended youthfulness.  

Thought I'd add a hopeful bit of news amidst a seemingly relentless nadir of bad news this year.

Invulnerability, in effect, is equivalent to "campaign damage classes" x 4(or better), plus perhaps knockback resistance = campaign damage classes.   So if a typical character has defenses = campaign damage classes x 2, and no knockback resistance, then the "value" of invulnerability  is equal to campaign damage classes x 2, plus maybe 10-20 points of knockback resistance.   If campaign dc  = 12, then that's 24 points(x 2 for both physical and energy), plus 10-20 more points.  60-70 active points.  At least, to me, that seems like a reasonable costing, assuming that said invulnerability will typically have conditions that limit the utility(i.e., things and circumstances under which it doesn't work or is less effective).  

So any mechanics you want to use to simulate the fx should have an active cost in the ballpark of 50-80 points, imo.  It could be extra rPD/ED, it could be damage negation, it could be damage reduction ala the APG, it could be my invisible DCV idea(or perhaps some funky version of missile deflection), it could be a force wall, absorption, desolidification, or even some weird suppression field vs attacks.  But it's a highly useful ability, a "stop sign" ability, even, so the cost should be somewhat prohibitive.   

5 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

Well, the Texas Grand Opening could be off to an interesting start.  We haven't even opened yet and 4/30/2020 plunked in a big spike in cases.  I've been tracking the trend line in ye olde Excel and...

 

 

that's the direction that says we shouldn't open.  It'll be interesting to see what they do.

 

Death count is at 812, but we've had flu seasons that have gone as high as 3500 so I'm not sure how compelling this will be for the Governor.

 

I suspect this will get ignored and the re-opening will continue until the mid-May re-evaluation.

 

On a related note - the meat shortage appears to be a real thing.  Costco is generally flush with food - especially the butcher shop and the pork and chicken were all but gone.  Like big areas of blank white refrigerator.

 

 

 

Flu season is 8 months.  The first US case of COVID was about 100 days ago.  Those 800 deaths have mostly happened over the last 30 days.  3500 deaths over 8 months is about 400 per month.  

Whether I shall turn out to be the hero of my own life, or whether that station will be held by anybody else, these pages must show. To begin my life with the beginning of my life, I record that I was born (as I have been informed and believe) on a Friday, at twelve o'clock at night. And then the dragons arrived.

33 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Well, if Joe Biden becomes crippled by scandal, what choice would the party have but go to the runner-up? Especially this late in the process.

 

Not that I think it's likely they would do that, unless this made Biden obviously unelectable. But I'd hate to see a repeat of 2016, where Trump wins because too many people find his opponent unpalatable.

Doesn't work that way.  One of the suspended campaigns, like Warren, would jump in with the de facto endorsement of major Biden backers.  

Bernie is, flatly speaking, less electable than Biden even if this allegation is credible.  Evidence?   He couldn't beat Biden once it became a two-way race, even with more money and volunteers and ads than Biden had.  Doesn't inspire the moderate and minority bases of the party.  

1 hour ago, death tribble said:

Stronghold came up with one version that I had not thought of beforehand and that was hot sleep. Menton was one of those who underwent that.

I think that was for villains too dangerous to keep even in upgraded cells, so they put them into what would be more or less an induced coma for the duration of their incarceration.

17 minutes ago, ScottishFox said:

Recent testing in New York has suggested that over 20% of the people already have Covid-19 antibodies.  Statewide the rate is around 13.9%.

Cuomo said if the 13.9% statewide infection rate holds true, that would suggest a total amount of infections of around 2.7 million statewide, with a 0.5% death rate.

 

Full Article: https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/04/23/coronavirus-survey-reveals-13-9-percent-in-new-york-have-covid-19-antibodies-cuomo-says/  (100% NewsGuard rating).

 

Currently in Texas we're looking at 651 deaths and we'd have to reach 20,155 deaths to match New York's numbers (assuming 13.9% infection rate and 0.5% mortality rate).

Sweden, which is intentionally going for herd immunity, would have to reach 7,110 deaths using the same rates.  They are currently at 2,274.

 

My suspicion that we were doing more harm than good with the lock downs is growing.

 

 

 

 

2 things:

"Herd immunity" involves having about 70% of the population previously exposed and effectively immune, so they can't pass it on and the rate of spread diminishes.

The WHO has stated that it's "not yet proven" that previous infections of COVID confer immunity to subsequent infection.  Until that's proven, herd immunity isn't even a thing.  

So we're far short of the infection levels necessary for herd immunity, and there's not even definitive proof we can achieve it yet.  A 0.5% Infection fatality rate would mean a million deaths if 70% of our population were infected.  Even 0.1 would mean 200k deaths.

So,in my last major campaign setting, set a bit forwards in time and technology, society had decided to abolish both the death penalty and "life" imprisonment(people have extended lifespans, so it became wildly impractical to lock people up that long).  Instead, the maximum term of imprisonment is around 50 years(25 base, plus getting denied parole every 5 years for the next 25).  What to do with criminals beyond that point?  A number of options were developed:

1) Voluntary Behavior Modification Treatment: essentially a high tech version of "psychic surgery": the criminal is implanted with inhibitions against unlawful acts and with a general impulse to be a "good citizen".  The treatment isn't perfect, but generally recidivism among those treated is pretty low.  There are ethical objections, of course, partially offset by the voluntary nature of the treatment and by efforts to refine the treatments to be as narrowly tailored as possible.  B-Mod, as it is called, is not permanent and may require periodic checkups and retreatments.  

2) Depowering: Depending upon the nature of the criminal's superpowers(and assuming their refusal of other options), the criminal may be subject to depowering, assuming it is technically feasible to do so.  A process strips away their powers, and if impermanent the subject may be required to return periodically to "extend" the depowering.  After a sufficiently long period of "good behavior", the subject may be able to petition to have their powers restored.

3) Exile: Kind of an "extreme" form of deportation, the criminal agrees to be sent outside the jurisdiction of the holding authority, sometimes even beyond the bounds of the solar system(!).  Violation of exile will result in the subject being treated as an active, violent and dangerous threat and initial response tailored accordingly(i.e., returning from exile is nearly suicidal in practice).  

4) Extraordinary Public Service--the criminal's sentence is reduced or expunged, in exchange for which the criminal engages in "extraordinary public service" for the government in question, embarking on extremely dangerous missions (e.g., defending the planet from an alien invasion, taking down a dangerous madman with weapons of mass destruction, etc.).  Not all criminals will qualify for this option(a "Joker" type most likely would not, for example).  

5) Involuntary Commitment--this option is generally disfavored, but if a criminal is adjudicated to remain a threat to themselves or others, and has refused all other options, a handful of facilities designed to accommodate the superpowered "criminally insane" exist.  Even here, indefinite lifetime commitment is disfavored.  

What options exist in your worlds? 

41 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:

 

There is one key difference in the present, Liaden: a rather large game changer called "The Internet". Unlike any preceding era, we now have a wealth of information at our fingertips no matter where we go (okay, barring certain nations that clamp down on unrestricted access, but other than them...). Despite the prevalence of ignorance and bountiful supply of snake oil you can find on the Wild Web, an individual can also easily dispel historical inaccuracies that have accrued in their mental storehouse and learn that there are indeed better ways to go about organizing this little thing we call civilization. It is also far more difficult to dehumanize entire cultures when you can see that every corner of the world had its ups and downs: morally, ethically, economically, spiritually, etc. Additionally, it is challenging for the powerful to walk back their stupidity/foolishness/bigotry when their words are instantly spread out to a multitude of websites.

 

We know that the status quo isn't desirable. We feel anger towards those that want to pretend that the pace of change must be stuck at a level of 1776 and raised no further.

Ironically, the pace of change in 1776 was rather swift--we rebelled against a monarchy, set up an imperfect confederation, then drafted a constitution, with a bill of rights, all within a couple decades.  

That being said, when half the political establishment is dead set on going backwards in many ways, sometimes incremental forward progress is the best that can be managed in the short term.  All it will take, though, to break this logjam is a shift of a few percentage points in net political and policy preferences.  That could happen due to demographic changes, that could happen by younger voters becoming more engaged, or it could happen by attitudinal changes among the existing electoral base.  We might see evidence of the latter in this coming election.  

22 hours ago, Bazza said:

A Himalayan Griffon vulture...in battle mode | Chopta, Uttarakhand | December 2017

 

Looks like a pissed off chocobo.

I once wrote invulnerability up as Extra DCV, Fully Invisible.  Unless you hit the character really well, it would appear that you struck them dead on to absolutely no effect.  There were some additional caveats(didn't work vs magic or if the character was surprised in combat, e.g.), but in practice it would be an extremely intimidating way to do it.  Also, it costs no END.  Most GMs would scream about a PC with that gimmick, though(I was a GM and it was a mega/master villain).  

One of the APGs offers 100% Damage Reduction as an option.  

Basically, I would say any creative power build that is around 40+ active points or more is a good candidate--Extra PD/ED, Force Field(invisible), Barrier/Force Wall(self-surface only), Damage Negation, Damage Reduction, Desolid, etc.  Then you apply appropriate limitations to both get the cost down and set the conditions/sfx the invulnerability doesn't work against.  

It's a bit too low-key and obvious work for The Smirk, the World's Greatest Practical Joker, to have done it.  Probably a copycat of some kind.  Vigilance would probably blow it off unless it gets more sinister/harmful.  TechWiz would try to find the culprit.  

30 minutes ago, GM Joe said:

It's absolutely true that socially we have had real progress. Not uniformly across the country, and there is still resistance to all of it -- widespread resistance, even. But the support ratio has definitely flipped on a lot of things. And that is unqualifiedly good.

 

But on the issues that the wealthy care the most about, the movement is ever in their favor. Sure, after they get a large tax cut, the D's may come in there and give them a tiny tax increase, but then the next R will just give them another large cut. The D's may do a little regulation here and there to clean up the environment or some such, but the R's will just undo that and more. And so on.

 

And all the while things that would do the most to help people move up the ladder are off the table. At best, we get funhouse mirror versions of those things, like the Heritage Foundation inspired ACA. Or we fight like hell, finally get a small win on some issue legislatively, and then it's undone by the courts.

 

To be clear, I'm not saying everything is terrible and hopeless. I'm not saying Biden will be uniformly bad. He will probably do what he can, within the limits of what his campaign donors (insurance companies, banks, wall street, etc.) will allow.  Which is better than we're getting now, and will be critically important for some people. Which is why I always vote for the lesser evil...making me complicit in evil.

FYI the rest of the Heritage Foundation plan involved "phasing out" Medicare and Medicaid, so the ACA is actually a vast improvement over the plan. it's also why I can get health insurance now, for the record.  Millions are still not covered, but millions more have gotten coverage (affordable coverage) as a result of that compromise legislation.  Incremental change isn't worthless.  

45 keeps saying that we're fighting an "invisible enemy" and beating it.  But...if the enemy is invisible, how do we know we're beating it?  

The lesser of two evils is, by definition, less evil.  A conscientious voter/citizen's first duty is harm reduction, imo.  Biden will bring positive, constructive public change in many areas, perhaps not as sweeping as many would like, but absolutely the changes will be for the better.  A presidential incumbent whose own party refuses to hold him accountable or responsible for anything, or say no to his worst impulses, will be completely unrestrained should he win reelection, the very last line of accountability left.  As someone who is well left of center, this is an absolute no-brainer call for me.  

I do note that CN drops some of the clunkier aspects of HS3E, such as END batteries, diminishing returns for multiple disads of the same type, differential costing for stats, figureds, etc.  Longtime hero players will recognize the mechanics but will also notice a lot of stuff has been streamlined or just plain dropped.  

It seems to be kind of a "postmodern" version based on 3rd edition.  The stats are presented in terms of what they do first.  The rules focus first on the genre, the conventions, character conception and using disads(situations) first to define the character.  If I had to venture any constructive criticism, it would be that there aren't enough writeups included for it to feel fully fleshed out, and that from the standpoint of "playing right away out of the box", it's less than straightforward.  Of course, I'm biased as a longtime Champions player, going back to the early-mid 80s.  I'll have to read it some more and mull it over some more to have a more fleshed out review of it.