dirnctiwnsidj

The measurement can be influenced by practice. The g factor—the thing IQ tests are designed to measure—appears to be immune to practice, though I am not sure how this was determined.

Similar tests, like the SAT and GRE, are designed to work even with practice. They have other problems.

This sounds like sour grapes. Python is a general-purpose language. Languages like Awk and Perl and Bash are clearly domain-specific, but Python is a pretty normal procedural language (with OO bolted on). The fact that it is dynamic and high-level does not mean it is unsuited for applications or the back-end. People use high-level dynamic languages for servers all the time, like Groovy or Ruby or, hell, even Node.js.

What about Python makes it unsuitable for those purposes other than its performance?

They are controversial amongst laymen, as evidenced by the discussion here.

They are not controversial at all amongst psychologists. The notion that IQ tests have predictive power is about as settled as the notion that "people get sad sometimes".

Maybe the theory is strange to you, but the correlation is real. Ability to solve these puzzles correlates with ability in a diverse range of cognitive abilities, including things like ability to write poetry that initially seem impossible to measure. It is even correlated with height!

No one cares about the ability to score well on IQ tests. They care about the things an IQ test can predict.