## Friday, February 13, 2015

### My bans

I have already exposed the quailty of moderators at tomshardware. I want to recall similar cases.

First time I was banned at stackoverflow for asking this question, why is there timediff type in Python. Programmers are brainless. They refused to consider any of mine arguments (that there is no such type in other languages, that absolute time/space is actually relative to some predefined reference point and therefore should also be treated similarly and why there is a type for timediff but not for spacediff or time second diff). They have no argument besides "time is time, time difference is time difference". They dotn't even try to understand why I consider this wrong. Mine question, all mine arguments motived me to ask it, was basically ignored. They cannot see the argument even if you repeat it all the time. They cannot discuss. Discussion means responding to the arguments. When you ignore the arguments you do not remove the raised issues anyhow. Programmers are blind.

Actually, I there was also another python question that received a lot of dowuvotes. I asked how to incorporate another script into mine file as if it was a part of mine file. I tried to do this through import directive. However, the answer was execfile(declarations.py). Nobody of pythoners replied with that. I had to discover it myself but it was clear to them that this is what I want and import is difficult to adapt for this purpose. Python is a interpreted language and this execfile() is ideally in its spirit. Yet, pythoners were angry when I reported my discovery to them. They wanted to protect me by downvoting and banning at python.freenode.org (this newsgroup acutally motivated me initially to look in the import direction).

irc://irc.freenode.net/physics moderator xihr also banned me on my first visit. I asked about energy. Moderator first told me that unstrained spring (by convention) has 0 potential energy and in any perturbed state (expanded or contracted) it has lower energy, again by convention. When I recalled him that coupled with principle of min energy this means that spring will tend away from unstrained state, he first tried to elude preaching "that this is only convention and energy direvative rather than absolute value that is important" and finally banned me.

Mine first ban was at java.sun.com for not buying that super must be the first call in constructor. It was an anecdote. They tried to argument by insisting that this is natural. You need to make an ape or mammal before you tailor it to man, they told me. They did not notice that this is nonsence, that nature has nothing to do with first creating a mammal and then expanding this being (how can it ever exist?) with human features. They have not noticed that this is unnatural nonsense even after I drawn their attention to it. They have not just noticed mine remark. They ignore any argument. They only added that super is not a simple function and doing any work in super is also bad. They seem cannot see that objects always change and there is no such thing as "constructed object" and constructors must be banned.

Java community also considered defiant my idea of functions as values terrible blasphemy (functions will never be the first class citizens in Java, they imposed upon me). Meantime, they appreciated the idea in Scala and realized that cannot live without in java. Nobody notices that Scala Worksheets is nothing more than do all the work in the initializers. Basically all mine ideas that I was attacked for by bigots in the past are now adopted.

They have responded that I was wrong because called human a monkey representative rather than ape. This detail proves everything and particularly that super must be the first call. That is a level of discussion when you challange the programmers' dogmas. Actually I also disagreed with nonsense that there is no getExtension method in File API in Java because extension is something Windows-specific. The proof link demonstrating that in Linux and even Java relies on file extensions was ignored as usually (bigots are ignorant). Basically, bigot argument was "it is right, because it is java and if you think that this is wrong then you are wrong". Pretty religious mindset. It is not surprising that they are blind.

Actually, I was also challenged java design by asking why I cannot refer inner class, declared later (idiots tried to convince me that class does not exist before execution reaches its declaration, ignoring all mine reminders about compilation time -- all java classes are created before app even starts). Another challeging statement was that there is a need to request the object form Set by key. They failed to understand why Map is redundant. This my claim received some recogintion only after I've lost the authorship over this answer at stackoverflow (you may start downvoting it).

At programmers.stackexchange I was banned for asking the same question about super. One of the idiots even replied me with the anecdote above about the apes, which I used as example of nonsense that programmers use to support another nonsense and asked to to repeat it.

At freenode#windows I was banned for not agreeing that batch commands are executed in blocking mode, prog2 after prog1 when calling prog1 && prog2. Initially they argued that this is programming question because first command compiled a C prog, another was execution of the program. They claimed that I need to close file handles properly. Elaborating "which file handles?" (my prog did not open anything and it was Windows who failed to close the handle before starting to execute gcc in the next iteration), they have sent me to win32 and programming. Asking which programming, they started to teach me (calling dumb, this is their privelege) that batch commands are asynchronous and I must to call start /wait myprog instead. This did not help and they have banned me.

I was banned at physicsforums.org by Russ Waters. First I asked physical question, why do we ever accelerate? It is surprising because P = Fv = 0, at v=0, which imlies that dE = dt * 0 = 0 and thus kinetic energy E=mv²/2 is not increasing, and thus, v remains zero. The nazi first responded that speed is not free and depends on acceleration. I wondered how can you say that and how can this resolve the paradox. This led to another revelation. It was discovered that our mentor teaches some nonsense, he confuses derivative with difference. Instead of reducing his arrogance, when this was realized after my several requests, the mentor used his flaw to attack me. It was intactful from my side to bring his mistake to surface. Such note from his side was enough to recover his reputation, render me as shit and ensure that problem was resolved. This bastard banned me later, once I challenged US imperialism in their political section. Whereas he dared himself to cruse at US dissidents (e.g. William Bloom was harassed as unfair because that writer is interested in his books being sold), he removed my thread that I started exposing the reality not shown in US TV. Particularly, the terrorists, supported by (Obama, I think already at that time, government) in Syria (that was before the ISIS and US allied with the terrorists in their "War against terror"). Governments (imperialistic, at least) need such criminals at their job.

The paradox was resolved easily by Russians at http://dxdy.ru/topic61178.html. They also banned me later for not respecting their moderator, who quarantined my question until I start using latex for 3 letters. This is only one more or less justified ban. At least it was the only one case where moderator pursued some high ideals (too far, in my opinion) rather than punished person for his own incompetence.

I was banned at odnako.org (conservative pro-Putin website) for reminding some inconvenient truths (they remove them, I put them back) and calling bastards with curse words. I am banned at Russian liberal sites as soon as I open a mouth.

At SO, I was banned completely when, after they as usually spoiled my question with stupid trolling insulting comments. It was a question about productivity. I asked if slight physical leg or hand activity during in the office chair is favorable to productivity, describing that mine (there was a period when I had to bend my back and do other exercises all the time due to pain and I received a boost of productivity at that period despite I pain was not leaving my head). They responded that this is an anecdote, that they do not see not see any question and migrated by question into skeptics (drained the toilet) rephrasing it "is it right that physical exercises improve caridovascular health?". This was obvious false that I asked this question. I was outraged to the core by and replied with "you must die with your culture". To fix the mistake and ask me for excuse they have banned me completely.

Now, they close questions like crazy. It seems that it is their job to close as many questions as possible. It is ridicoulous how stupid reasons they find to close the question. I would like to rescue this one (it is closed with the reason "opinion based" and closer especially remarks that it is undoubtful that the guess asked to confitm in this question was publically recornized) How the heck the thing that is publically recognized is opinion-based?

# What is the genetic IQ? [on hold]

 I asked Helmuth Nyborg how it is possible that average western IQ is going down and keeps growing at the same time as he claimed in The Decay of Western Civilization... He responded that the Flynn effect (smartness test) measures the "phenotypic IQ" whereas: "The dysgenic effect of low-IQ immigration and internal condition, in which low-IQ parents have fewer children than high-IQ parents is a g-effect, driving genotypic IQ Down." He says that "Arthur Jensen describes these tendencies in his famous book: The g factor." Published in 1998 on Praeger Press." Indeed, this makes sense; however, I do not understand how these psychologists can measure the genotypic IQ? I believe that IQ is a phenotypic manifestation of the genotype. DNA has no brain to measure the intelligence. Yet, genotype can develop into a phenotype. The only way I could see to measure the genetic IQ would be after the genotype has developed into a phenotype. Therefore, phenotypical and genotypical IQ is the same thing. I therefore do not understand how there can be a difference between genotypical and phenotypical IQ. What are they talking about? How do they measure it? Or, is it just fascist nonsense? 12 Dec 2013 From a recent email from Nyborg: If you adjust for heritability by multiplying measured IQ by, say, .6, .7, or .8 (depending on how heritabable you find IQ is), you get a rough estimate of “genotypic” IQ (a term that may be slightly misleading, as you have not factually accounted for the genetic basis of IQ). The Flynn rise in IQ possibly has to do with factors like testsmartness, nutrition, environmental stimulation etc.