This is will be my narcissistic post (that word will provide you lots of
fodder I am sure), and simply because I have been meaning to document
this, I set off about analyzing today what Eric Raymond had written, and
it seems to fit with where the discussion ended up here.
And I think perhaps this may be my (2nd to the) final post in this WG
(that is not a promise, but nearly a certainty, because there is no point
to continue here). Ian knows where to reach me in private to ask any
questions on the superior design I contributed, if he wants to. I
appreciate that the WG will probably find a way to not employ it or
attribute it to another person.
Feel free to completely ignore this, attack it, or what ever. However, I
think the following is very relevant to compare how some people in this WG
reacted to me and how Linus Tovald reacted below...
Post by Shelby Moore
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1404 (Ego is for little people)
Also I highly suggest this for those people that argue that my polymath
I am lucky because I had the curse of the UNgifted! I was routinely
underestimated in my life due to my above-average but not genius level
verbal and visual cortex.
I hope you noticed the sub-link in that immediately above link where Eric
Raymond basically put Linus Tovald in his place:
And how Linus responded:
What is my IQ? Well on standardized tests it is only 130 - 140:
But the problem is that it is very difficult to measure the VERY NARROW
(but widely applicable to polymath, e.g. economics, philosophy, etc) area
of IQ where I may be off the charts, because my verbal and visual cortex
is only about 115 - 120 IQ. I am not genius at visual pattern matching. In
the area of visualizing mathematical relationships, the answers just come
to me immediately as if my brain is operating on auto-pilot and I am just
an observer of myself. But the other problem is measuring this capability
is that I am not genius in loading the data points nor communicating the
result. Once I get the data points loaded, then the solution is instant.
So it is extremely difficult to both measure my IQ and for me to
communicate something once I visualize it. I get easily frustrated with
the wall between my mind and shared understanding. That is why I love
programming, because I don't have to communicate anything, the code just
flows straight from my mind. I do best with languages that have a minimum
vocabulary. I have found errors in the online tests with respect to
philosophy questions. I am very unmotivated by a lot of details, I prefer
to remember only the essense or theorem.
Just now, I solved the following puzzle in a matter of minutes, and it
wouldn't have taken me that long except for the fact that I haven't been
doing any geometry for decades so took me just a few minutes to get my
mind in that mode:Loading Image...
The area of the larger circle is found by using Pythagorean's theorem and
noting that distance from the center of the larger circle to the chord
forms a equilateral triangle which is 1/3 the area of the equilateral of
the 3 similar chords. And then the distance from the center of the smaller
circle to the chord is also found bh/2 = A. Then you've got the radius of
the larger circle.
I don't know when I started to read, but I do know that I could build
things with my hands and entertain adults in conversation as an infant. At
age of 5, I observed my very high IQ father (big time attorney for oil
companies) and his buddies trying to build a wood platform in the back of
VW bus. Apparently they were struggling with the design. I gave them the
design nonchalantly. In college, my roommate was amazed that I built a
huge bunk bed for us, simply by walking up to a pile of wood and start
sawing and hammering away at full speed without pause. Within a couple of
hours we were finished. I didn't even have to think about how to design
it. He reminded me in email the other day after I hadn't heard from him
for 2 decades, that we were lacking one 2x4 near the end, and luckily it
came floating down the gutter in a rainstorm like a gift from God.
to wait until the next day and was able to retype it almost verbatim. I
had a picture of it in my mind. But I can't do that from the visual
cortex, I don't have genius photographic memory. I am not particularly
good a chess nor Rubiks cube nor remembering a serial pattern, but also I
have never studied how to be good at those.
Eric Raymond is so much more intelligient than me, because he has
amazingly well rounded IQ (and his design visualization may be higher than
And his design visualization is probably higher than mine too, but I seem
to share his generative rule formulation ability, but I can't communicate
it and it takes me a while to be understand that I am applying a
generative rule (it happens on auto-pilot):