Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Programming IQ

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-26 18:36

Sup /prog/
Take this test http://iqtest.dk/
and post your result
For me, 122 with 15 stddev

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-28 17:38

>>120
You can tune a reiserfs, but you can't GET AWAY WITH MURDER

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-28 20:43

I got 145. No shit - and I did almost get laid once.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 1:57

>>122
bullshit. explanation of 39 now

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 9:54

>>123
SPOILER: ROTATIONAL SYMMETRY

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 9:57

>>1-124
SPOILER: FAGGOTS

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 11:56

>>125
Spoiler:Butthurt Downs syndrome Scheme User.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 12:08

>>126
Spoiler:Back to /FAGGOT/, please.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 12:28

>>127
Back to the ward please

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 15:10

>>123
SPOILER:>>124 SPEAKS LIES

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 15:59

>>123
39 is difficult, but here's what you need to know:

- the symbols turn into different symbols for each iteration: X becomes O, O becomes triangle, triangle becomes X
- the grid shifts itself right by one column each time, with wraparound
- the first column of the grid shifts itself down by one row each time, also with wraparound

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 16:07

>>129
but look, if we number the squares 1 to 9, 3 rotates to 4 and 5 rotates to 6 - that's the only pattern i noticed so i failed it ahah

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 18:19

Oh come on. Even /b/ figured this shit out in less than 131 replies.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 18:49

>>132
/b/ 1200000 people

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 19:44

>>132
/prog/ figured out in >>55,60 more than /b/ ever will. the rest of this thread is just /b/tards invading /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 21:38

>>134
Well, >>55 is actually a troll post (but perhaps you knew that anyway)

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 21:40

>>131
Yeah, they just put that in there to trip you up.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-29 21:52

>>135
>>55 and >>134 are the same person, you idiot.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 0:26

>>133
Taking into account the fact that a substantially lesser amount of people than those who browse /b/ casually would even consider the problems, not to mention those who decide to post about it, there's really no meaning behind a simple user statistic.

Ergo, /b/ > /prog/

Please prove me wrong.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 1:49

Please prove me wrong.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 2:13

Please prove me wrong.
See >>134.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 2:39

>>140
How does randomly choosing correct answers prove anything? Using that logic, every single test/examination ever conducted on earth throughout the history of time is flawed, because one is able to randomly guess the correct answers

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 2:51

>>141
see >>79.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 3:33

>>142
I like how you provide ZERO argumentative backup for your claim that the test is flawed. I'm done talking to you.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 3:37

>>143
everyone here thinks the test is flawed except you. why are you still arguing that the test isn't flawed when no one here agrees with you? are you the faggot who made the test or something?

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 4:31

>>144
Let's see some goddamn proof. Do you have anything, an article, a statement from a noteworthy person, anything at all that denounces this particular test? Enjoy being butthurt over your 60 IQ, coal miner peasant.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 4:39

>>145
your flawed test says my IQ is 145. find somewhere else to spam your test. somewhere like /pr/. they like spam.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 4:41

also, why do you keep bumping the thread?

Name: Aureax 2008-12-30 5:28

>>18

Me tooo... 154. =]

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 5:28

>>130
Use spoiler tags next time, genius.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 5:59

>>146
Except you getting 145 doesn't prove shit about the test. Try again, pissant.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 8:08

HERE HAVE THOSE REALLY FUCKING EASY QUESTIONS THAT EVEN AT 10-YEAR-OLD COULD ANSWER ALMOST PERFECTLY.

HOLY SHIT YOU'RE A GENIUS!

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 9:22

>>13
"Anyone who cares about IQ is stupid".
Lies.  Or link 2 source!

>>18
It amazes me how many dumb motherfuckers I know who score higher 140 on IQ tests.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 9:29

>>152
Oh holy shit he is right
How high is Hawking's IQ? The physicist replied that he didn't know.
"People who boast about their IQ are losers," he said.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 12:36

110 >:(
it are fake

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 14:46

>>154
Don't feel so bad. There are many jobs suitable for 110 IQ. For instance, using coal for heat is now becoming trendy, and so society will need someone to mine coal. Someone with a 110 IQ, say. Additionally, society can never have too many garbage men, a career very much suited for 110 IQ.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 14:47

>>1-155
sage this shite

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 14:50

Why is everyone bad mouthing coal mining? I mined coal last winter as a part-time job, it was awesome. Some of the guys there have read Atlas Shrugged even

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 14:54

>>155
Lol no, while 110 is not very high, it is not something to be ashamed of; still greater than the average. If I believed that IQ means something, I'd openly admit that I'm proud of my 119.

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 15:17

>>151
Yeah, there are like 3 hard questions and the rest are really easy.  And I can only think of one problem that I'd consider to be of "intermediate" difficulty.

So then why did I only score 126?  :-(

Name: Anonymous 2008-12-30 15:26

>>158
Nobody said anything about being ashamed. Do you think coal mining and garbage collecting are shameful professions?
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -