4 ms·

I don't get the XKCD analogy. Are you inferring that women who are aware that the actual statistics say that they will be murdered by a loved one are more likel

I don't get the XKCD analogy. Are you inferring that women who are aware that the actual statistics say that they will be murdered by a loved one are more likely to be killed by a stranger?

karpierz 4y ago
The implication is that the statistics are what they are under the condition that women take the precautions that they do. In other words, the 1/X statistic is conditioned on the average person's precautions (like not walking outside in a lightning storm), and by not applying on those precautions, you're using the statistic outside of the distribution that it applies to.
- snovv_crash 4y ago
  The issue that GGP brings up though is that women actually aren't following these guidelines since they date complete strangers via these apps.
godelski 4y ago
The analogy is about an aggregation error when using statistics. While the statistic is true it is not accounting for the environment one is in (it has aggregated all environments). Of course there's a big difference asking a girl on a first date on a hike in the woods vs meeting at Starbucks. (A lot of statistical paradoxes are because of aggregation errors. Conditional estimation matters a lot)
- snovv_crash 4y ago
  It's also a risk/reward thing though. Putting an obstacle to the first date is a great filter to remove people who aren't particularly interested or who would have incompatible lifestyle. From this respect a hike might be far preferably to Starbucks.
  - godelski 4y ago
    While I don't think you're wrong, I think the issue with the hike is being missed. It is a more dangerous situation meeting someone alone in the wilderness (exaggerating a bit) vs meeting them in a very public place that has cameras. That was the intended note. But I think there are also some complications you're missing. These lifestyles matches can be a form of luck. Maybe you're having a busy week. You're probably paying attention to the app less because of course you will. On the other hand if you're being set up by a friend then that friend can be like "hey, they're busy this week but let's set you up next" and there is more empathy involved. A major problem with dating apps is that they are trying to be that friend that sets you up but they are doing a really terrible job at replicating what that friend is able to actually do.

I don't get the XKCD analogy. Are you inferring that women who are aware that the actual statistics say that they will be murdered by a loved one are more likely to be killed by a stranger?

karpierz 4y ago

The implication is that the statistics are what they are under the condition that women take the precautions that they do. In other words, the 1/X statistic is conditioned on the average person's precautions (like not walking outside in a lightning storm), and by not applying on those precautions, you're using the statistic outside of the distribution that it applies to.

snovv_crash 4y ago
The issue that GGP brings up though is that women actually aren't following these guidelines since they date complete strangers via these apps.

godelski 4y ago

The analogy is about an aggregation error when using statistics. While the statistic is true it is not accounting for the environment one is in (it has aggregated all environments). Of course there's a big difference asking a girl on a first date on a hike in the woods vs meeting at Starbucks. (A lot of statistical paradoxes are because of aggregation errors. Conditional estimation matters a lot)

snovv_crash 4y ago
It's also a risk/reward thing though. Putting an obstacle to the first date is a great filter to remove people who aren't particularly interested or who would have incompatible lifestyle. From this respect a hike might be far preferably to Starbucks.
- godelski 4y ago
  While I don't think you're wrong, I think the issue with the hike is being missed. It is a more dangerous situation meeting someone alone in the wilderness (exaggerating a bit) vs meeting them in a very public place that has cameras. That was the intended note. But I think there are also some complications you're missing. These lifestyles matches can be a form of luck. Maybe you're having a busy week. You're probably paying attention to the app less because of course you will. On the other hand if you're being set up by a friend then that friend can be like "hey, they're busy this week but let's set you up next" and there is more empathy involved. A major problem with dating apps is that they are trying to be that friend that sets you up but they are doing a really terrible job at replicating what that friend is able to actually do.