@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
Too much of the population uses online dating to still claim sampling is flawed to this extent.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
If the irregularity was close to what you see in IQ bell curves between the sexes, or between races, you could have had a point. But this is an extreme difference.

@alyx @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam Oh, I want to point out here that I have been saying "remain on dating sites" as opposed to "use dating sites" for a reason.

If someone uses a dating app for 1 month, pairs off with someone, then deletes the app, you get less data out of them.

If someone uses the dating app for 12 months unsuccessfully, then you get a lot of data out of them.

Most of this data is coming from people who stayed on the dating app and didn't pair off successfully.

@alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @alyx @icedquinn @Ashalam to make that a bit more explicit. if you sample across (ex) a 1 week period. you get a snapshot of the people on during that time. which includes all the "new" people from the past few weeks. but older accounts that had success will be missing. and those will probably build up quite a bit before someone gives up and leaves

actually people with success using it for serial hookups might end up with the highest representation since they're the only ones incentivized to stay in the long term

@roboneko @Ashalam @alyx @icedquinn Your argument that serial hookups being high representation may be right. However, for arguing that this data does not generalize, it is not necessary to make that argument.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
A single person who stays 12 months on a dating site is not gonna become 12 data points, while a person that stays 1 month only provides 1 data point. That's not how studies are made. This is a severely erroneous assumption. If someone were to make this mistake in constructing a study, I would demand they be thrown out of academia.
Studies show a snapshot in 1 point of time, where each individual is 1 data point. That's it. You don't need to track the views of people who got married out of dating sites to get an unbiased view on how dating men rate women and vice-versa.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam the problem is what happens to the sample over time. people come and people go but they don't do so at the same rates. so certain populations will build up on the site

the study is a snapshot, but the point is, what is it a snapshot _of_?

@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam
>so certain populations will build up on the site
I disagree.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam why? if populations leave at a different rate than they join then you will establish some equilibrium

if every day you add 5 red and 5 blue marbles to a bag. and then you remove 10% of the red ones and 30% of the blue ones. you will not have a 50/50 mix in the bag

@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam
I've explained far too much already. At this point I'm feeling like I'm talking to a stubborn wall.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam you have demonstrated a remarkable lack of understanding of basic statistics imo

@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam
Fuck. You.

@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam
You seriously don't get to say that. No.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam why don't I? do you think my impression of you is wrong? if so, why? is there any particular reason you believe yourself to have a good grasp of statistical phenomena?

I've done quite a bit of that math for various reasons and I still frequently get confused by it

which brings up another good example. genetic algorithms. they operate on a very similar principle. lots of trash goes in, stuff that's only slightly better gets selected for slightly more frequently, and eventually you're left with really good stuff

@alyx @Ashalam @icedquinn @roboneko my man, I want to point out that the things you and I think are obvious may not actually be obvious to an average observer. Moreover, our friend here is emotionally charged right now - I think it is bad to bring out the textbooks right now.

@alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @alyx @Ashalam @icedquinn true it probably wasn't the most constructive approach in context but while blunt it's not a personal attack. I'd be willing to listen if he could articulate *why* he thought I was wrong

@roboneko @Ashalam @alyx @icedquinn He did start to bring up a valid counterpoint - that there's people who stop using dating sites for reasons other than pairing off. However, he won't hear that the equilibrium these things reach is not distributed like the actual dating population from either of us anymore.

He's gone done stormed off 'cause you ticked him off. I understand it's tempting to tweak the guy's nose like that, but I'd wanted to actually get something through to him!

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @Ashalam @alyx @icedquinn I see. This is all about Jewish number magic. Statistics are okay but real life is not a number. The solution here gentleman is get a pooch and go to the gym. Or as the rappers in the 90's said, fuck hoe's, get money. I was expecting something much more agregious for this kind of freak out this is a bit silly tbh ha

@SoyMagnus @roboneko @icedquinn @alyx @Ashalam >get a pooch
🤔 Yes, but that is how you get women to be sexually attracted to your dog and not you.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @alyx @Ashalam oh I just don't care about women. That's not a technique to get women, but a companion all boys need a pupperoni it mandatory & the moment u get one u lose interest in sluts

@SoyMagnus @roboneko @icedquinn @alyx @Ashalam This is fair. I personally prefer adult human friends, but mostly of the male variety and in completely platonic ways.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @SoyMagnus @alyx @Ashalam Get a small dog and she'll treat it like a child instead.

@Zettour @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Ashalam @alyx @icedquinn @roboneko get a shepherd dog and it'll bite her when she bothers you
IMG_20221114_201308_713.jpg

@Zettour @roboneko @icedquinn @SoyMagnus @alyx @Ashalam >woman treating the dog like a child
🤔 Explain why this doesn't involve her sexing the dog.
8kpbj9jnhay91.png

@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam

@alyx @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam >This entire conversation
30ce88597b2b95d9c502b71ed7cd2840c808bc4d270a7b06b2dc2b10d886b2e7.png

@alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @alyx @icedquinn @Ashalam

> has two eyes

@roboneko @Ashalam @alyx @icedquinn That one has been saved in my folder for years and this is the first time she gets to come out.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam well if you really did mute me then you probably won't see this but your misunderstanding is the "increasing forever" bit. simple equilibria look like a sigmoid. which is also (approximately) what large human populations look like post industrialization btw

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam it's true tho. you have to realize that he isn't arguing a particular view on women here. he's merely pointing out limitations of the data. he's saying "you can't assume [thing]" not "[particular view] is how women are"

@roboneko @alyx @Ashalam @icedquinn I should point out that "observing that samples are flawed" is a mistake that serious researchers make a lot, so it is a little unfair to say this.

@alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @alyx @Ashalam @icedquinn I wouldn't accuse anyone of that for failing to notice a flaw in a data set. this was related to the objections regarding population composition and was immediately preceded by that marbles example

it's the basic principle on which (just for starters) genetics, distillation, and chemical equilibria all operate

@alyx @icedquinn @Ashalam I'm going to bookmark this to explain to you later, unless @roboneko can drill it into your mind.

I will point that the OKCupid data is not an academic study - it is a corporation publishing their data.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
Sorry man, nothing you said convinces me that this severe difference can be explained away. There is something else underlying there, that you refuse to believe, because you're probably still stuck in your mind believing women are flawless beings.
News flash: they're not.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
And it's hilarious, that EVEN IN YOUR ARGUMENTS for why men handsome would be less represented in the data, YOU ARGUE that women are more picky, have much higher standards etc. But then you desperately try to disprove data that shows EXACTLY THAT.

@alyx @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam I point out - again - that in those arguments, I am pointing out that there are many valid interpretations of the data. I point out *again* that each of those arguments for what the data says is something that *someone* would believe - even if they imply totally different things!

It would do you well to slow down for a moment and think.

@alyx @alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam

> you're probably still stuck in your mind believing women are flawless beings. News flash: they're not.

lmao I can see you aren't at all familiar with the sort of things he posts of all the people to say that to

@roboneko @alyx @Ashalam @icedquinn I'd not wanted to bring that particular one up myself, although I certainly *did* have that thought.

I did not think it constructive to play into the emotional issue. I sincerely wanted him to understand that there is more at play with these dating app statistics than he believes.