斯科特·汉瑟曼（Scott Hanselman），我29岁，但是我读的是43岁的水平

In snooping around some blogs, I noticed a few with a banner like this, indicating membership in a Mensa-like society (of which there are at least a baker's dozen).  If you take their "Ultimate IQ Test" and score over a certain point (the population mean is 100) then you are "gifted" and you can join the club.  Apparently Mensa will take high SAT scores as an alternative.  So, I took the test, which is fun and took like 45 minutes.  I hadn't taken an IQ test since High School Psychology class, and I've apparently grown more stupid with age.  Anyway, I passed, joined their mailing list, and checked out their searchable membership list and even noticed a few INETA members! :)

在窥探一些博客时，我注意到一些带有这样的横幅的横幅，表明它是类似Mensa的社会的成员(其中至少有面包师一打)。 如果您参加他们的“终极智商测试”并在某个点上得分(总体平均值为100)，那么您会被“赠予”并且可以加入该俱乐部。 显然，Mensa将采用较高的SAT成绩作为替代方案。 因此，我参加了测试，这很有趣，大约需要45分钟。 自从高中心理学课程以来，我还没有参加过智商测试，而且随着年龄的增长，我显然变得越来越愚蠢。 无论如何，我通过了，加入了他们的邮件列表，并查看了他们可搜索的会员列表，甚至注意到了一些INETA会员！ :)

IQ tests, especially Culture-Non-Specific ones are interesting as they don't ask for answers to trivia, but rather they challenge one to recognize patterns and manipulate 2- and 3-D objects in mind space.

智商测试(尤其是非特定文化的测试)很有趣，因为它们不要求琐事的答案，而是挑战一个人以识别模式并操纵思维空间中的2D和3D对象。

So, this all got me thinking about IQ tests in terms of technical certifications.  Why are people willing to include Fred Fredrickson, MCDBA but not Fred Fredrickson, IQ163?  Wouldn't this tell prospective clients that this particular chap had a penchant for critical thinking?  Sometimes IQ tests will come up during casual conversation and folks will say, "aah, that's B.S., you can't take them seriously."  A lot of thought and attention goes into IQ test development; do we think that technical certifications also partake in such detailed analysis?  I don't know about you, but some of the tests I've taken had the certain "thrown together at 3am" feel...much like this post!

因此，这一切使我想到了基于技术认证的IQ测试。 为什么人们愿意包括MCDBA的Fred Fredrickson，而不包括IQ163的Fred Fredrickson？ 这难道不告诉准客户这个特殊的家伙喜欢批判性思维吗？ 有时，在非正式交谈中会进行智商测试，而人们会说：“啊，那是BS，您不能认真对待它们。” 智商测试开发投入了大量的思想和精力。 我们认为技术认证也参与了如此详细的分析吗？ 我不了解您，但是我参加的某些测试让您感到“凌晨3点一起扔”的感觉……就像这篇文章！

Why don't we tell people our IQs?  Because it's rude, that's why.  Why are we willing to proclaim acumen in specific 'vertical' skillsets like Computers or Neurosurgery, but we're reticent to say, "I'm just generally smart.  Gotta lots of background threads going, you know.  Lots of neurons firing."  People are quick to say, "I kicked ass on that MCSD test," but you don't hear a lot of College GPAs or SATs bandied about.   Got that Cisco Cert do ya?  But when it comes to the GMATs, "I'm not a good test taker."

我们为什么不告诉人们我们的智商？ 因为不礼貌，所以。 为什么我们愿意在诸如计算机或神经外科等特定的“垂直”技能集上广为人知，但我们不愿说：“我通常很聪明。要知道，有很多后台线程在运行。许多神经元正在触发。” 人们很快就会说：“我在MCSD测试中被踢了，”但是您并没有听到很多关于大学GPA或SAT的争论。 得到了思科证书吗？ 但是谈到GMAT时，“我不是一个很好的应试者。”

Somehow broad, 'horizontal' declarations of brainpower come off as snooty, but knowing what bit to flip can be overlooked by the less-skilled as, "well he's clearly read some technical book I didn't."  Folks don't mind not knowing what they feel are trivial details of some particular subculture, but they do mind broad labels like stupid or smart.

不知何故，“水平”的脑力宣告是愚蠢的，但是知道要翻转的东西会被那些不太熟练的人忽略，因为“他显然读过我没读过的一些技术书。” 人们不介意不知道自己的感受是某些特定亚文化的琐碎细节，但他们确实介意像愚蠢或聪明的广泛标签。

So, from now on, in the interest of intellectual and vocational honesty, I'm signing everything like this:

因此，从现在开始，出于知识和职业诚信的考虑，我将签署以下所有内容：

Scott Hanselman, I'm 29, but I'm reading at a 43 year-old level.

斯科特·汉塞尔曼(Scott Hanselman)，我29岁，但是我读的是43岁的水平。

 

翻译自: https://www.hanselman.com/blog/scott-hanselman-im-29-but-im-reading-at-a-43-yearold-level