Back in May, Forbes released their 2018 list of the World’s Most Powerful People, not to be confused with Pumpkin Person’s 2018 list of the 100 most influential living people of all time. Power is what you can do. Influence is about what you have done. Here’s the top five in power according to Forbes:
From the perspective of HBD, it seems symbolic than an East Asian is #1. Don’t agree with Putin being #2. If any other foreign leader is more power that Trump it should be Bibi, given that Trump recently ripped up the Iran nuclear deal.
Forbes explains how the list was created:
To compile the ranking of The World’s Most Powerful People, we considered hundreds of candidates from various walks of life all around the globe, and measured their power along four dimensions. First, we asked whether the candidate has power over lots of people. Pope Francis, ranked #6, is the spiritual leader of more than a billion Catholics. Doug McMillon (#23), is the CEO of the world’s largest private employer, Wal-Mart Stores, with more than 2.3 million workers around the globe.
Next we assessed the financial resources controlled by each person. Are they relatively large compared to their peers? For heads of state we used GDP, while for CEOs, we looked at measures like their company’s assets and revenues. When candidates have a high personal net worth, like the world’s richest man, Jeff Bezos (#5), we also took that into consideration. In certain instances we considered other valuable resources at the candidate’s disposal, like access to oil reserves.
Then we determined if the candidate is powerful in multiple spheres. There are only 75 slots on our list –one for approximately every 100 million people on the planet– so being powerful in just one area is often not enough. Our picks project their influence in myriad ways: Elon Musk (#25) has power in the auto business through Tesla Motors, in the aerospace industry through SpaceX, because he’s a billionaire, and because he’s a highly respected tech visionary.
Lastly, we made sure that the candidates actively used their power. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un (#36) has near absolute control over the lives of the 25 million people who live in his country, and is known to punish dissent with death.
To calculate the final rankings, a panel of Forbes editors ranked all of our candidates in each of these four dimensions of power, and those individual rankings were averaged into a composite score. This year’s list comes at a time of rapid and profound change, and represents our best guess about who will matter in the year to come.
In my previous discussion of the World’s richest people, I noted that blacks were dramatically underrepresented in wealth, but given the cultural capital of black celebs, one might have expected more blacks among the World’s most powerful.
And yet blacks are only about 1% of the list, despite being 15% of the World’s population, and despite all the super famous U.S. blacks, not a single African American made the list this year. It seems blacks get a lot of fame, visibility and status, but are still locked out of power.
To quote J.R. Ewing, “nobody gives you power. Real power, is something that you take.”
When is your next Pumpkin Person list coming out?
You had everyone else make their list for your examination. (which thread was that?)
2019
Forbes had about as much chance of naming robert rubin or steve schwarzmann as naming a cebtral asian dictoator. High iq people who dont sudder from aspergers dont read mainstream media puppy.
Actually pill, you have all the symptoms of aspergers:
1) obsessed with one topic (jews)
2) vivid imagination
3) grim sadism
4) endless bottled up anger
5) bad at reading the intentions of others
Philosopher is INTJ _ he is an empiricist (extroverted thinking) and sees anything else as Aspergers. (Introverted Intuition) is perspective perception of seeing every angle of situations.
Animekitty is INFP and has had psychological trauma that show up psychosomatically.
(Introverted Feeling) is the extreme empath and hundreds of tones of emotion recognition.
(Extraverted Intuition) is unlimited creative potential and sees all the ways thing can be. it is like a web of connections that gets denser as connect the dots.
I consistently get INTJ as well. Type 5 and 8 on enneagram. Yourself?
Type 5 and 2
I don’t read mainstream media.
The only times are when I am in the hospital from my episodes.
You and philosopher are so alike
composure
evidential
Cat’s life is very interesting! One of the good parts of this blog.
Why did you choose that specific picture of the cats? Its a really cute picture.
Cats > dogs
Mainstream media is an iq test. But a social one. One asks himself. Am i being treated like a 15 year old?
True intleiigence is seeig the media is a psychological warfare operation, not about judgement or information gathering.
Chomsly said this not me. And hes a jew. So are u going to ban this comment?
psychological warfare operation
better just call it propaganda or agitprop. but it’s more than that, because mass media’s bias is not just in how they cover “the news”, it’s also in what they choose to cover and what they choose to ignore. that is, there is no objective “the news”. it’s obvious but lost on most people afaict.
Mainstream media is an iq test. But a social one.
And one that you would fail.
[redacted by pp, july 8, 2018] CBS is owned by a jew. MSNBC and NBC are owned by comcast which is owned by jews. ABC is owned by disney. disney’s largest shareholders are its current CEO, bob iger. CNN is owned by ATT.
ATT’s largest shareholders:
Vanguard Total Stock Mkt Idx
Vanguard 500 Index Inv
SPDR® S&P 500 ETF
Vanguard Institutional Index I
Fidelity Spartan® 500 Index Inv
top individual shareholders in ATT:
Randall L. Stephenson (current CEO of ATT owns 916k shares)
John T. Stankey (current CEO of entertainment subsidiary)
John J. Stephens (current CFO)
Rafael de la Vega (former CEO)
ATT has 6.141b shares outstanding.
Sumner Redstone, owner of National Amusements, controls CBS by way of his majority ownership of the company’s Class A voting stock.
comcast: Owners Roberts family (33% voting power)
fox: Owner Murdoch family (17%) (equity) (39%) (voting power)
show me that jews control ATT [redacted by pp, July 8, 2018]
CNN was founded and owned by a gentile (ted turner) before he sold it to jews who sold it to ATT.
If white people of english ancestry would have owned all those, they would shit on irish, scots, indians. If irish owned it they would shit on english and scots. If scots owned it they would shit on english, irish and possibly jewish. If french owned it they would shit on english, if germans owned it they would shit on jews and possibly everybody else.
If hispanics owned them they would shit on whites and blacks, if blacks owned them they would shit on whites and hispanics.
peepee doesn’t care about her fellow lesbians of color.
Mug of Pee doesn’t care about his fellow monolingual men who have sex with men in public washrooms
processing speed can be slow because of low dexterity.
not necessarily because the mind is slow in executive function.
the stroop test measures executive functioning. (anterior cingulate cortex)
I was 135 in 2009 on the stroop test.
figure weights should be in working memory index, not perceptual reasoning.
I should be IQ 118
0.81 * 32 = 25.92
0.91 * 21 = 19.11
0.80 * 6 = 4.8
0.69 * 35 = 24.15
73.98 / 4 = 18.495
The supreme court pick is disappointing. Not as bad as [redacted by pp, july 10, 2018], but he strikes me as a cuckold conservative.
3 brand new chomsky vids up on youtube for the first time in months.
[redacted by pp, july 10, 2018]
the point of shoe’s paper is that he was able to predict height so much better than educational attainment, 40% vs 9%. why does this prove that however many SNPs shoe uses h^2 will still be pathetic? [redacted by pp, july 10, 2018]
Because it implies that even in the unlikely event that he can double height’s h^2 to 80%, education’s would only be expected to double to 18%. But Mug of Pee’s too dumb to realize education’s just a crude proxy for IQ, so IQ’s heritability is perhaps much higher.
[redacted by pp, july 10, 2018]
both are psychological traits, and have the same heritability.
[redacted by pp, july 10, 2018]
depends what you mean by education attainment. Score on an achievement test, or simply number of years of education. If it’s the latter I’d expect the heritability to be much less cause years of schooling greatly influenced by social class.
say there was a trait caused by one SNP and no one without the SNP had this trait. then unless that one SNP happened to be in the sample for the machine nothing can be learned. suppose two traits are highly polygenic, but one is more polygenic than the other. then more of the SNPs affecting the latter trait will be picked up in a 20k sample of SNPs, BUT a smaller percentage of the total such that the estimated h^2 is the same for both traits.
[redacted by pp, July 10, 2018]
suppose one has two bins filled with white balls and black balls. the black balls are the SNPs affecting the trait (or the genetic differences tagged by the SNP), the white balls the possible differences having no affect.
suppose for simplicity each bin contains 10,000 balls and one bin has 2,000 black balls and the other has 500.
now scoop out 500 balls from each bin. what you will find is that the black balls scooped out of each bin as a fraction of the black balls in each bin will be MUCH closer than 9% vs 40% as a fraction of the plateau value.
example values for the above:
4.00% 4.70%
4.40% 4.45%
4.60% 6.15%
5.60% 5.20%
5.20% 5.05%
HBD = russia investigation
9% = trump jr met with a russian lawyer and trump doesn’t insult putin and therefore “russia hacked our democracy.”
Wheres is the new open thread
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210287/
If education attainment in the hsu study was measured by GCSE scores you have a point but if it was just measured by years of education, you don’t.
IQ is to years of schooling as height is to years spent playing basketball. How heritable would that be compared to height?
[name redacted by pp, july 10, 2018] educational attainment is a sufficiently good proxy and is a psychological trait in its own right.
Presumably, significantly more or higher quality data will be required to capture most of the SNP heritability of this trait.
obviously professor shoe hasn’t thought about this much.
Shell attainment is a “sufficiently good” proxy for IQ by a subjective standard of sufficiency – a fairly low subjective standard. In a country with a highly meritocratic education system, where no-one misses out on educational opportunities for, e.g. financial reasons, or bias in admissions processes, and standards were equally rigorous across institutions and disciplines, educational attainment would be a very useful measure of the abilities of the population. In societies where these conditions did not obtain, it would be as much or more a measure of the parents’ socioeconomic class.