Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Unfortunately, your specification of the "B" category appears to leave no room for a distinction between, say, a guy who likes uber-masculine men and uber-feminine women, versus a guy who likes humans more toward the center of the scale. (I assume the first guy would like 0.1 and 0.9 people, and you'd record it as the average, 0.5; and the second guy would obviously like 0.5's.)

Clearly we would need a graph with a bunch of data points representing the person's attraction to humans everywhere along the gender scale. For example, at a resolution of 0.1:

  gender score: attractiveness
  0.0: ----------------
  0.1: ----------------
  0.2: -------------
  0.3: ---------
  0.4: ---
  0.5: --
  0.6: ----------
  0.7: ----
  0.8: -
  0.9: ----
  1.0: --------------
And while we're at it, why don't we add scales for attractiveness due to body type, perceived youthfulness, hair color, etc. (Let's hope they can be considered independently. Dear god, the complexity if that weren't the case--I suspect it isn't...) Methinks this is a problem that could suck up as much, or as little, effort as you're willing to put into it.

Some people--probably people who spend a lot of time dating, and who are attractive enough to be able to choose for whatever traits they want--would actually find useful the ability to specify things like that. Others might not care, or might not even know what difference most of these traits make to them (I would probably fall into this last category). Mmm, it might be interesting to see what the hardcore daters would discover about their own preferences (and how they might change over the course of dating). Does anyone know of any interesting studies or results in this area?




Interesting thoughts, and I agree with most of them. Perhaps you could think of my two number scale as a first approximation...? :)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: