h a l f b a k e r yI like this idea, only I think it should be run by the government.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I'm sitting online and might chat if approached, but don't want to waste anyone's time replying to nonsubstantive inquiries. What are my options now ... complain about my feelings to the Halfbakery audience?
I propose a AIM filter that I may set to accept IM inquiries only after the sender answers
an objective question. The question would be more or less difficult according to what degree of brightness I'd open myself to; say, 90 if I was in a really good mood and didn't want to talk to anyone retarded about the stock market or prescription aphrodisiacs.
There must be a bajillion questions that reliably test a person's thinking and reasoning abilities, like:
How many points is a three-point shot worth?
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
or:
Complete "What are we ___________ do now?"
1. gone to
2. going to
3. go to
4. fiuckn to
or:
Best answer:
How many digits difference between 'too young' and 'too old'?
1. one
2. two
3. three
4. four
or:
What is the number that is 2 more than one-tenth of one-tenth of one-tenth of 3000? [type answer]
Trillian SPAMChallange
http://www.donkeyea...nSPAMChallenge.html
Worth a look ... courtesy of [superultra] [dpsyplc, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 05 2004]
[link]
|
| |
Who's buried in Grant's tomb? |
|
| |
When you go to a site that asks you to type a word in a box that's a little distorted, this is to make sure no one has set up a program to carry out an action at a specific time automatically. Ticketmaster does this to ensure that real people are buying tickets. |
|
| |
This is just to make sure there's a cognitive being on the other end, but so does your question. |
|
| |
Very good. If I didn't care who called there is "default", or they can type the word in the picture. |
|
| |
You could have a a question preared that's designed to intrigue them and make them put some thought into the answer. If you like their answer enough, you talk to them. |
|
| |
IQ really has nothing to do with intelligence in general, only a specific kind of intelligence. But then, I've never taken an IQ test; if I scored really high I'd probably say there's somethin' to it. |
|
| |
[dpsypic] is this and open book test cause i didnt study. I haven't been online to where I would get IM'd in so long but thinks its a great idea. |
|
| |
Some thoughts travel straight up your mind's elevator; some thoughts travel down that elevator at express speeds. Remember that the top floor is always empty. |
|
| |
Why call this "IQ-based"? Because the user (called, shall I say, "I"), from a GUI selects an IQ I feel can probably talk sense to me right now. If I'm feeling like shit, maybe I'm afraid to talk down to someone and annoy them, so I can set my IQ preference rather high. Then prowlers will encounter a series of questions geared to differentiate IQ >|< 115 that they will answer before their IM client will notify me they're checking on me, and I can probably speak my mind if I answer an IM and the caller becomes friendly. |
|
| |
My belief in the success of this idea is based upon a relationship I perceive to exist between attention span and objectivity. Ever notice that a one-stringed violinist can coax a simple but captivating tune from the instrument but that you're pained to feel anything other than empathy for the poor soul? |
|
| |
Actually, Trillian (which interoperates with AIM) has a "Spam Challenge" Plugin (here http://www.donkeyears.com/TrillianSPAMChallenge.html ) that fits exactly what you're thinking of. |
|
| |
Hey! Thanks, [superultra]! I use Trillian, but I'm very bad about surfing over to see the news. I'm probably one of the last to adopt the Google no-new-windows tools. |
|
| |
how do you propose to measure IQ with a single question? i understand how this could test for the existance of intellegance, but quantifying it accurately would require a more complicated trial. this would probably put people off. |
|
| |