Such self-fondling pabulum around here. If Aristotle can be wrong, so can Einstein. See: IQ data.
I bet at least the number of people who posted want to say the same thing, but have refrained from posting. I bet frikkin' Paul Graham thinks the same thing (maybe gentler) - he's alluded to 'inexpressible ideas about race' (paraphrase) in one essay.
> It turns out that lots of people get their klotho levels increased as a side-effect of taking prescription forms of “activated” vitamin D (VDRAs) for chronic kidney disease (CKD). But there’s no reason to wait until you’re almost dying and need dialysis to start benefiting from this knowledge. Instead, this implies that taking something like 0.25 mcg/day of Calcitriol or 1 mcg/day of Paricalcitol right now for someone without the beneficial KL-VS variant of the KL gene might actually give a huge longevity and IQ boost.
You can never go wrong with exercise; that´s for sure.
But I wanted to comment in the activated Vitamin D. People with CKD get this form of vitamin D because their kidneys cannot build it (the last hydroxylation step occurs in the kidney). So, in theory, supplementing with regular Vitamin D3 could boost IQ and longevity.
No, the difference is in the added word troll, not simply a defender. Trolls are non-practicing, and produce nothing and protect nothing. I'm sure a legitimate 'little guy' with a patent would get all the sympathy he deserves here, unless perhaps, as you mention, it's a software patent.
I think you're missing the point. You can't distinguish between the patent troll and the little guy inventor because their rights are one and the same. A patent troll purchases the right to enforce a patent from an inventor who would otherwise not have the resources to enforce it himself. It is that right, the right granted to the inventor, that is being enforced. Without the patent troll the inventor's rights would get trampled by the large corporations. Hence, the patent troll is defending the small inventor's rights.
The fact that the patent troll is not practicing the invention matters not. There is no requirement that a patent holder practice the patent in order to enforce it. I can assure you the big corporations do not practice all patents they hold and enforce, many just get licensed out - and there's nothing wrong with that. But there also shouldn't be anything wrong with the small inventor doing the same thing, except for him it often requires the help of a patent troll. The patent troll is just doing for the inventor what the big corporations do for themselves, thus leveling the playing field.
To be fair, "ability to learn, process on the fly, and pull together disparate information" is indeed "indeed distinct from IQ", but only in the pedantic sense that it'd be more accurate to say such capacities refer to g.
But then...IQ is indeed a reliable, verifiable, and efficient indicator of g, so...indeed.