Jump to content

Anastasis

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    28358
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Anastasis

  1. Thanks, quoted what I think is the relevant methods section below. Various scales, some of which were combined, and then further composited with other scales. Political orientation was assessed with the single item “What is your political orientation?” on a 1–5 scale ranging from “extremely conservative” to “extremely liberal.” Authoritarianism was measured using 12 items capturing three facets of authoritarianism (subordination, aggression, and conventionalism) from Duckitt, Bizumic, Krauss, and Heled (2010)’s tripartite authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism model. Egalitarianism was measured with eight items from Feldman and Steenbergen (2001) and Feldman (1988). Religiousness was assessed with the 9-item religiousness scale created by Koenig, McGue, Krueger, and Bouchard (2005). The scale asks about participation in and frequency of religious activities. 11 items were used to measure socialism liberalism and six measuring fiscal conservatism. These items were adapted from similar questions in the General Social Survey items (Smith, Davern, Freese, & Morgan, 2018). A list of all items for each scale can be found in the supplementary materials of Willoughby, Giannelis, Ludeke, Klemmensen, et al. (2021). Correlations among our political scales are presented in Table 3. Due to the high correlations among the variables, we create a composite measure to summarise the relationship between intelligence and political opinion. Authoritarianism, egalitarianism, social liberalism and fiscal conservatism scales are combined to create a sum score called the political composite. Before summing, we change the signs of our scales so higher scores indicate left-wing views, ensuring that high composite scores indicate left-wing views too. A scale was coded as being left-wing or right-wing by its correlation with authoritarianism, which is assumed to be right-wing. Example items are shown in Table 2.
  2. That response has nothing to do with the request for more details on exactly what scales they used to assess political orientation. It's not a gotcha, it's a reasonable request if you want to the discuss the abstract you posted.
  3. Today is the 76th anniversary of deir yassin. Within a month the mandate expired, Israel declared independence, and the Arab countries and Israel were at war. It’s been a real box of chocolates since.
  4. More details on the political orientation scales used please.
  5. That was dope. Got a good minute of totality before a cloud took over.
  6. Cloud cover just got very heavy. Can’t see the sun if I tried.
  7. Got a couple glimpses, but now totally obscured by cloud cover.
  8. This was the coolest part about the last one.
  9. There are reports that the turn around time is speeding up. But plans on timeframe measure in months. I think my last one was like 10 or 11.
  10. Anastasis

    Austin FC

    No hand ball lol. Of course.
  11. At risk of hot taking, this is exactly right. But only because stern talking to means exactly that and has no real consequences.
  12. I am sorry guys, I know its a beating to see the same avatar over and over and over again. No commentary so diapers are unsoiled hopefully. But its the news thread so here you go: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-looking-report-that-israel-used-ai-identify-bombing-targets-gaza-2024-04-04/ WASHINGTON, April 4 (Reuters) - The United States was looking into a media report that the Israeli military has been using artificial intelligence to help identify bombing targets in Gaza, White House national security spokesperson John Kirby told CNN on Thursday. Kirby, in the CNN interview, said the U.S. had not verified the content of the media report published in +972 Magazine and Local Call, opens new tab on Wednesday. It cited Israeli intelligence officials involved in the reported program known as "Lavender." The media report said the Israeli army had marked tens of thousands of Gazans as suspects for assassination, using the AI system with little human oversight. The Israeli Defense Forces denies that AI was used to identify suspected extremists and targets. "The IDF does not use an artificial intelligence system that identifies terrorist operatives or tries to predict whether a person is a terrorist. Information systems are merely tools for analysts in the target identification process," the IDF said in a statement. The statement added that IDF directives mandate analysts to conduct independent examinations, in which they verify that the identified targets meet the relevant definitions in line with international law and Israeli guidelines.
×
×
  • Create New...