💀
@icedquinn
No... this is precisely what I would have expected. Women have no evolutionary pressure to select for happy men. They evolved to select for successful and powerful men. That's pretty much it. Men's emotions don't play much of a role in that. The slight pride uptick is more of a byproduct of successful men.
On the other side of the coin, the evolutionary pressure on men is to protect women and ensure their happiness, because men's goal is to make women faithful to them. So from the start, women being happy is what men want.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
So is the general idea that women on dating sites just happen to be far worse people than women in the general population?
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
I think that's wishful thinking.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @icedquinn @Ashalam
Too much of the population uses online dating to still claim sampling is flawed to this extent.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @icedquinn @Ashalam
You seriously don't get to say that. No.
while blunt it's not a personal attack. I'd be willing to listen if he could articulate *why* he thought I was wrong
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!
🤔 Yes, but that is how you get women to be sexually attracted to your dog and not you.
IMG_20221114_201308_713.jpg
🤔 Explain why this doesn't involve her sexing the dog.
8kpbj9jnhay91.png
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
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