= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Elo comments on The application of the secretary problem to real life dating - 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 (44)
You have raised some interesting alternative problems to applying this solution to real life. I suspect that most people don't think very hard about it; and they like to enjoy relationships/life/existence for the purpose of existing.
Trouble is that it's a lot harder to count; but yes - the candidate space grows when you start thinking that the shorter ones are fair attempts...
now that I think about it a bit harder; as long as you have a determining factor for how frequently you can process trials (i.e. how long a relationship is, or more specifically how many you can have in each year of your trial-time-period), you can still work out the 1/e time-point, and possibly use that for a heuristic of exploration/exploitation time-point...
Apart from enjoyment a relationship also provides for personal growth.
Yea; I had to skip all the other reasons to have relationships in order to specifically attack the reduced problem of the assumption of:
There are certainly companionship values for having relationships that are worthwhile doing; but that's not what this post was about.
I don't think the plan to have children is simply about finding a suitable mate. It's also about developing the skill set of being a good parent and having an enduring relationship that doesn't break apart after a few years.
I don't disagree with these points.
Can you clarify what you are suggesting by bringing them up?
I don't see a large extend of skill building in the post but it mainly being about effective ways of evaluating suitable mates.