= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
trist comments on Is love a good idea? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (84)
Transhumanist values are probably higher than average in that group, but I have no idea of numbers there. Clicking with you and a more refined definition of attraction I can't speak to, but if you've come in contact with 5 in your time at college... There's still lots.
I'm guessing that's from a base of 100? If so, you're off by almost a standard deviation there: the mean world IQ is very far from Western normed 100s. IIRC, the population weighted estimate from the Lynn national IQ estimates puts the global mean at maybe 90. That's going to affect the tails like 145+ a lot.
Of course... I thought 100 was meant to be the global mean. Lynn set Great Britian's mean, nothing like a flexible definition!
The (not very good) data doesn't bear out a 90ish global mean though, the sub-90 IQ countries are much lower population than over 90. To be pessimistic I'd take another half sigma. (92.5)
Actually useful numbers may be able to be obtained by using more locale specific filters.
Who exactly cares about intelligent people half-way across the globe anyway, when personal relationships (and the possibility of finding people with whom those are possible) are the issue?
You can meet them online, or move to other countries. Personally, for such an estimate I'd be looking only at Anglophones: learning a language just to increase one's dating pool seems pretty far to go for love.
Hence the actually useful numbers bit! Yet I do care to some extent, if for some reason I end up there in future, just less then everyone here and now. Maybe one could weight populations by inverse distance?
OTOH, a linear combination of Gaussians with a standard deviation of 15 and different means will not be a Gaussian and will have a standard deviation larger than 15. So a naive calculation as in trist's comment below will be an underestimate.
That's not accurate; did you mean 13/10000?
Given that a couple were taken and a couple were incompatible for various other reasons, that I expect a higher proportion of guys to be taken as I get older, and that I will never be in such a high-density environment again... I really don't think 1 real prospect every couple of years, who may or may not work out as an actual relationship, is a high hit rate at all. Certainly not high enough that I would ever consider someone I was in a successful relationship with to be "easily replaceable."
Thanks, fixed.
I have a hard time seeing people as replaceable, much less easially. Even between two people who fit some abstracted ideal, one won't replace another. Leaving that aside though, I think that the difficulty is more in finding the people who fit that ideal than their actual existence.
xkcd: Dating Pools
(Though this graph from The Case For An Older Woman on OkTrends suggests otherwise -- but I'm not sure a 40-year-old single guy is as likely to be on OkCupid as a 20-year-old one is.)