Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BGB <cr88192@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: old power, Short Vectors Versus Long Vectors
Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 21:58:09 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <v16sk2$1l514$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v06vdb$17r2v$1@dont-email.me> <v0rbck$2jor1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0rhce$1itj$1@gal.iecc.com> <v0rk4c$2lnd6$4@dont-email.me>
 <v0s5gd$1mk0$1@gal.iecc.com> <v10mdk$krs$1@dont-email.me>
 <df75c399d37898bab65453d6f3871209@www.novabbs.org>
 <v11mme$b3hb$1@dont-email.me> <v13l16$onc3$1@dont-email.me>
 <ebed4559bf2176f10d7a88208e4df03f@www.novabbs.org>
 <v16d5g$1eedr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 05 May 2024 04:58:11 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cc08dcaf13314637553bde0ccb7c7647";
	logging-data="1741860"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19cWjBJkr5MO1QpoT5zwG0457bc2USPE0M="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ycjoEPgSZPWxLGeKkyHXm0z0fK4=
In-Reply-To: <v16d5g$1eedr$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3584

On 5/4/2024 5:34 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> MitchAlsup1 <mitchalsup@aol.com> schrieb:
>> BGB wrote:
> 
>> If you are anything like a normal male, you are compatible with about
>> 1% of women of your age group. Likewise, 1% of any given women in your
>> age group will be compatible with you ±.
>>
>> So, you (and her) will have to pass over 10,000 of the others to end
>> up with a compatible partner.
> 
> Even assuming that the numbers are true (far too low, IMHO), the
> calculation assumes that both quantities are uncorrelated.
> 
> If it were really true, humans would long since have died out
> (unless "compatible" means something else :-)


 From what I have seen, for normal people, it appears to be:
Go for one person;
Then go for the next person;
Play musical chairs until either "good enough" or the situation dictates 
that they stay with whoever is their current partner;
With a certain percentage chance of adverse consequences or being stuck 
with a poor option.

Then throw on talk about "soul mates" or whatever as a post-hoc 
explanation for whoever they ended up with.

Well, and/or the females don't settle, and then go into rants about how 
none of the guys they have dated have had enough money...



Would be convenient if one could (more generally) just sort of do 
cost/benefit evaluations and have both parties present whatever 
information is likely relevant for the other to consider, etc, and then 
allow each person to do cost/benefit considerations before deciding how 
they want to proceed (if at all).
But, for most females, they don't play along with this.


Occasionally, some do the whole "where do you see yourself in 5 years?" 
thing, but I will generally take a pass on this... (like, if they are 
going to ask questions in this way, I already know they are not what I 
am looking for; among various other sorts of questions).

If they are more looking for someone to spend money on them under the 
pretense of a relationship, not really interested. Or, if they fail to 
understand me in fundamental ways, or are unable to communicate on a 
meaningful level, also not interested.

....