Why a lot of programmers are also metalheads?

Come on Jow Forums make up your mind.
I can confirm though that spics do listen to metal.

JFL at the swole mallet on the far right

the only good spic metal band i know of is Angra

Attached: angra_02.jpg (656x430, 63K)

Im in the whole fucking range, though I start at alternative and maxout at Radiohead. I'm not nigger dumb... Tentatively...

> high schooler
> calling himself mathematician and programmer

yikes

Real white men listen to metal while writing Assembly in an editor they made themselves in Python.

I bet he's the product manager.

Only a nigger lover or a shabbos goy would listen to jazz. Even niggers dont like that shit.

I listen to metal and I'm a shit programmer.

what about sepultura you double nigger.

I'm an amazing programmer and I listen to anything but metal

>shit methodology
Also it's retarded to call it music that makes you dumb, when its not at all about music's effect on your intellegence, but about what the intelligence of the people.

Attached: lol.png (991x355, 43K)

>tfw exclusively listen to mid 2000s Southern rap
>still scored 1520/1600 on the SATs

youtube.com/watch?v=2klTw123_jw The anthem of my youth

I've had 1349 discography on repeat for the past 6 or so months and recently got promoted

Isnt the SAT biased?

Explain how.

I only listen to Eurobeat. Where would I fall?

It's a "come from a rich neighbourhood" test more than anything else.

This shows that the pic up above only shows the musical tastes of the people who attend colleges that net good SAT scores, which is probably geographical and socioeconomic at best.

Do foreign students take the SAT? They'll obviously only want to go to the good colleges and they'll skew the results further since they won't give a shit about mainstream American stuff.

Again, explain how, I got a 1380 on the SAT in 2004 and I wasn't rich, didn't take any practice exam, etc.

i think its more of a "not being a stupid retard" test, with some big words you will absolutely never use thrown in at you

>I got a 1380 on the SAT
And you can't guess something so basic? economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/sat-scores-and-family-income/

>I wasn't rich, didn't take any practice exam, etc.
No shit, there are outliers for everything.

>in Python.
wtf

You think a 1380 is supposed to be good?

>The smartest people listen to u2, radiohead, and bob dylan
like clockwork

Non-larpers are jacks of all trades who aren't limited to sepples.

Except stupid people will naturally be lower income, especially the dumbest people like criminals, whose offspring probably won't be much better.

Like, you're stating a correlation when you're missing the point. People who run their lives into the ground, and their offspring, SHOULD be at a statistical disadvantage in an objective intelligence test. It'd be biased if it DIDN'T show that. If you're advocating for a system where everyone gets an equal chance, then the chips will just fall where they fall.

Actually, in 2004, it was, as the test was changed in 2005 and 2008, the test is much easier now, and even then in 2019 that's a good score.

>best mathematician + programmer in my year in high school
rofl

It's less about being dumb and more not having the same opportunities to learn when you have shitty role models, probably never saw a book outside of school and probably had to babysit your little siblings because your mom got arrested for walking. Besides, tons of kids never learn how to deal with stress and freak the fuck out in test situations. Then add factors like tutoring.

It's not much of an objective intelligence test when it's affected by your environment more than by any actual abilities when the said environment either prevents you from displaying said abilities or nurtures them. It's like calling some marathon an objective test of endurance when some people started fresh, some had years to prepare and others are forced to join after a hangover while recovering a broken leg.

I got a 27 on my ACT (1280-1300 on SAT using converter blog.prepscholar.com/act-to-sat-conversion) and my friend got a 31 on his (1420-1440) and we're both into metal and rock

Me personally? I'm a Perturbator aficionado.
youtube.com/watch?v=1Vsf3zYppP4

>meal head
>GHOST
wew

He hasnt released anything new unafortunately

because despite all my rage im still just a wage in a cage.

Attached: eurobeat.gif (225x640, 3.15M)

The only one of these that maintains any objectivity is tutoring as an advantage. The rest of it is at best excuses. Babysitting your siblings has zero effect on how well you do on a test like the SAT, even if you have to do it every day.

Look at this picture, just watching TV an hour every day through high school should give you the skills to answer questions like these.

Attached: sample.png (817x495, 108K)

A year ago he did release that new song...
But I honestly don't mind, what he did make is good enough to play on loops.

>Gospel

LMAO

>Correlation is not causation.
Despite being only....

>metalhead
>ghost
>

Attached: 1567208616155.jpg (1470x3024, 1.04M)

>ghost
>metal
They are a fucking pop rock band. Fuck them so much I hate them. Go listen to real metal.

>having constant mental stress and work won't affect your performance
>lack of sleep and nutrition won't affect your performance
Come on, nigga. Besides the lack of books and lack of positive reinforcement isn't going to tip the scales in your favour either. If they can't help you with your homework, you'll have an even harder time.

Having started reading at 4 or 5, and a single mom who made enough to buy me any book I wanted was such an ridiculous advantage, I cruised though HS while skipping 50% of the time and barely paying any attention towards the teachers. Obviously never studied either. All because I was lucky enough to have a parent who rewarded my curiosity. Tons of my friends during that time had parents who considered reading boring or gay; it was almost given that their kids would go "London is in America" or "Nazis started WW1".

>just watching TV an hour every day through high school should give you the skills to answer questions like these
If it's a decent news channel. Not Fox or sports or whatever shit your family is watching if they are poor and uneducated. Plus once again the social factor, your dad finally passed out from drinking and you can watch TV by yourself, switch to some documentary about JFK, and your crazy uncle drops by and start explaining how it's all lies by the Juice or some shit.

I never took the SAT, got into programming by reverse engineering DOS games in high school, and my favorite genre is old-style gabber
youtube.com/watch?v=65XiCIG2LYE

Just lol if you listen to anything else while programming.

Attached: standu.png (454x443, 583K)

Stop claiming poor people can't get their shit together, you're still just making excuses.

No, eating your average American diet (which poor people can perfectly afford) isn't a disadvantage when taking the SAT, and similar logic applies to the rest of your bullshit.

Here, let's make an example case: Create a real argument as to why someone not knowing what the word "benevolent" means is a nurture problem outside of horror fringe cases like parents locking their kids in the closet when they go grocery shopping or some other bullshit that doesn't apply statistically.

>If it's a decent news channel.
No, Fox, sports, hell even your average TV advertisement is gonna expose you to all of those words.

>Plus once again the social factor, your dad finally passed out from drinking and you can watch TV by yourself, switch to some documentary about JFK, and your crazy uncle drops by and start explaining how it's all lies by the Juice or some shit.
You don't even know how stupid you sound, your god awful scenario isn't an argument as to why someone wouldn't be able to answer the question in that pic. You're just making shit up and claiming its true.

>Stop claiming poor people can't get their shit together
The ones who can't would stay poor for long.

>which poor people can perfectly afford
That sort of shit makes it hard to take you seriously, you either seem to underestimate the issue or are totally clueless about it. Besides, being able to afford something doesn't mean you have the time to buy/cook/eat it.
ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=84972
>12.3 percent (15.6 million households) were food insecure. Food-insecure house- holds had difficulty at some time during the year providing enough food for all their members due to a lack of resources.
>4.9 percent of U.S. households (6.1 million households) had very low food security, essentially unchanged from 5.0 percent in 2015. In this more severe range of food insecurity, the food intake of some household members was reduced and normal eating patterns were disrupted at times during the year due to limited resources.
>Children were food insecure at times during the year in 8.0 percent of U.S. households with children (3.1 million households), essentially unchanged from 7.8 percent in 2015. These households were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food

>No, Fox, sports, hell even your average TV advertisement is gonna expose you to all of those words.
I opened their website for fun, and reading the headlines, the only words that would be considered complex would probably be "demented", "resolution", "autopsy" and maybe "coup"; with minimal context clues to guess what they mean. AFAIK the actual TV bits tends to be even dumber.
ESPN is hardly better and has tons of very topical words.
Advertisements tends to put the words in an idiotic context which drains all meaning. Shit, I just watched the Nintendo Switch Super Bowl Commercial and all they had was a simplistic pop song. Good luck learning from it.

>your god awful scenario
It's common fucking stuff, only god awful for sheltered people.

What the fuck are you talking about user, listening to metal makes it way easier to concentrate.

ghost isn't metal

Defining "poor diet" as food insecurity is a nonstarter, user, the government can define it all they want.

It's extremely easy to raise and feed a kid, even without a job, the government just pays for it. My mom did it for two years, she said all she had to do was fill out two job apps a week to show the government if they asked. Being fed enough to take a test is an extremely low standard and any American can afford it if they're short on cash.

>I opened their website for fun
I don't care what you think, spending decades listening to broadcasts is enough to know what all of the words in that pic up there are, and you're resorting to a shit personal opinion with cherrypicked examples. And that's not including the dozens of other sources ALL people are exposed to regardless of socioeconomic status, there's no excuse for no knowing what the word "benevolent" means by the time you take the SAT unless you're just unintelligent.

>It's common fucking stuff
It's non-problems that have zero effect on an intelligence test.

The one sitting.