Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The stable marriage problem and modern dating

arvarik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 224 posts

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#81

Post by in_cahoots »

eastbayjake wrote: post #62
YetAnotherMatt wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any data to back that up that you can share? I don't mean to call you out, it could very well be the case, people date in rather not-understandable ways to me. What you're saying does not match my experience though. Quite a few friends of mine have dated only very few people before getting married. Anecdotally, the marriages that seem to do the best are the marriages in which both partners did not have a…

> I'm aware of the negative selection bias there I'm guessing those marriages are likely correlated with strong shared religious beliefs[1] and closeness to extended families that help share the burden of raising children. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2857783/#:~:tex... .

That’s definitely not true in my circle of friends. Of my 6 closest high school friends (all female), the ones who didn’t date in high school all married first, to either their first or second partners. The ones who dated a ton are still dating in their early 30s. None of us are very religious, and we all live in traditional (American) families with commensurate amounts of support.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#82

Post by jhardy54 »

poorman wrote: post #55
toby wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> (it's since pivoted to a brewery run by active gang members) Would this be an appropriate place to share that story? Because I'm intrigued

The story has been written up by lots of news outlets. Googling "brewery run by active gang members" should start to paint the picture.

https://trucolors.co/

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#83

Post by viklove »

konaraddi wrote: post #53

At work, we had a problem that's similar to the stable marriage problem. We ended up finding another combinatorial optimization problem called the "assignment problem" [0] that fit more closely with our problem. Here's a brief summary of the assignment problem: Suppose you had people in two groups A and B where each individual in group A wants to pair up with an individual in group B and visa versa. If you can assign…

This isn't how it works in the real world at all, though. People want to optimize for their own pair, with no regard for "maximizing the sum of all compatibility scores." In other words, I don't care about anyone else's marriage, I only want me and my partner to be as happy as possible.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#84

Post by k__ »

mettamage wrote: post #60
YetAnotherMatt wrote: post #37

One factor that I didn't see addressed in the post which does make a significant impact is that men in general rate women more similarly than women rate men. See for example: https://www.marketingcharts.com/demographics-and-audiences/m... As such, male advantage is probably a lot lower in the real world, if (hyperbolic) every woman has a different man on nr 1 of their preference list, and every man has the same woman…

Attractiveness is just 1 factor it doesn’t determine if that person is number 1. You need some more factors for that.

Addict? Kinks? Religion? Politics? Music? Homeless? Job?

For most people any one of these point can be a deal breaker, even if he's a 10/10.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#85

Post by Enginerrrd »

eastbayjake wrote: post #62
YetAnotherMatt wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any data to back that up that you can share? I don't mean to call you out, it could very well be the case, people date in rather not-understandable ways to me. What you're saying does not match my experience though. Quite a few friends of mine have dated only very few people before getting married. Anecdotally, the marriages that seem to do the best are the marriages in which both partners did not have a…

> I'm aware of the negative selection bias there I'm guessing those marriages are likely correlated with strong shared religious beliefs[1] and closeness to extended families that help share the burden of raising children. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2857783/#:~:tex... .

As opposed to selection bias by being composed of people with a tendency toward stable monogamy? Because that would lead to fewer dating partners...

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#86

Post by pesfandiar »

toby wrote: post #45
poorman wrote: post #40

Having worked on a dating app startup with a 2m seed (it's since pivoted to a brewery run by active gang members), I can say the problem of dating is looked at horribly wrong. People assume dating is about finding the person "most compatible" with you. Compatibility is an illusion. Most people tend to date until they have an idea of "what they don't want". Once they know and they find someone who checks the boxes, th…

>> (it's since pivoted to a brewery run by active gang members) Would this be an appropriate place to share that story? Because I'm intrigued

Looks like it's this one: https://trucolors.co/

Based on OP's description, it sounded like a company taken over by gangs, but it's really a for-profit social enterprise.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#87

Post by viklove »

polote wrote: post #52
albntomat0 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is the "advantage" men have over women in this article is due to the average man finding the average women more attractive than the average woman finds the average man, at least in the data used. Without removing that, and assuming everyone pairs up, the "advantage" remains.

The advantage is amplified by the distribution of preferences, but in the classic simulation the advantage was already of 13%. It is due to the fact that they are the one choosing first

Are they the ones choosing first? I think it's completely the other way around. Consider the common Tinder/OkCupid situation where a man sends out hundreds of messages to only receive a few replies, while a woman has hundreds of messages waiting in her inbox, from which she gets to select her preferred match.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#88

Post by kibwen »

YetAnotherMatt wrote: post #48
poorman wrote: post #40

Having worked on a dating app startup with a 2m seed (it's since pivoted to a brewery run by active gang members), I can say the problem of dating is looked at horribly wrong. People assume dating is about finding the person "most compatible" with you. Compatibility is an illusion. Most people tend to date until they have an idea of "what they don't want". Once they know and they find someone who checks the boxes, th…

Do you have any data to back that up that you can share? I don't mean to call you out, it could very well be the case, people date in rather not-understandable ways to me. What you're saying does not match my experience though. Quite a few friends of mine have dated only very few people before getting married. Anecdotally, the marriages that seem to do the best are the marriages in which both partners did not have a…

The parent poster is being a bit overly specific, but the gist is correct: compatibility is mostly about finding someone who clears a list of minimum criteria (in contrast to the classically romantic notion of dating alluded to in the OP, which is more akin to finding a global maximum). Plenty of people may have relatively few criteria (are we roughly the same age? do we live in the same place? can we have children?), and so need less (or no) time in the dating pool to determine what their minimum criteria are. Other people are pickier and will spend more time figuring out what their deal-breakers are.

Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating

#89

Post by Retric »

watwut wrote: post #57
YetAnotherMatt wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any data to back that up that you can share? I don't mean to call you out, it could very well be the case, people date in rather not-understandable ways to me. What you're saying does not match my experience though. Quite a few friends of mine have dated only very few people before getting married. Anecdotally, the marriages that seem to do the best are the marriages in which both partners did not have a…

Because long term marriage is a lot about your tendency to create long term emotional ties to people. It is also about your willingness to think about relationship itself and put work on it. It is also about selection, but much more about ability to weed out abusive people and selfish people and so on. Of course also compatibility, clean freak will never be happy with messy person. And those abilities form a lot in c…

Looking at divorce statistics you find that pattern doesn’t really hold up. There are spikes around various life transitions like retirement which still occur even with long term emotional bonds. Long term relationships are a continuous negotiation as people’s want’s and needs change.

Edit: Collage education and getting first married at an older age significantly lower the odds of divorce. Which suggests having multiple prior relationships increase the odds of marriage success. However, we don’t have good statistics for this stuff.

Post reply on HN