From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" Message-ID: <87elir99y1.fsf@becket.becket.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii References: <20020310235950.C851319991@mail.cse.psu.edu>, <3.0.6.32.20020311134540.00998010@pop3.clear.net.nz> Subject: Re: [9fans] samuel Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 10:10:06 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 637eed30-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 andrew@mbmnz.co.nz (Andrew Simmons) writes: > >But, if you insist on building systems which require an IQ of more > >than 100 to operate, then by definition you are excluding more > >than 1/2 of the world's population from using the system. > > > Well, I don't see how that could be true by definition [...] Well, strictly it's not. IQ is (supposedly) normed with the average at 100. Alex Danilo's statement was I guess taking it that the median was 100. The point is still pretty much the same; if IQ follows a normal distribution, then they are identical criteria. Most people think they are above average, but it just ain't so. The average person is really, well, average. Thomas