<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More information about why I&#8217;m single&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/</link>
	<description>Tech discussion and thoughts on the digital lifestyle</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 02:10:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Random2CM6</title>
		<link>http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/#comment-2831</link>
		<dc:creator>Random2CM6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/#comment-2831</guid>
		<description>Okay, you have failed to account for some critical demographic data.

Half your charts have the 'over 65' crowd seperated, that means the remaining are 64 and under. The other chart has people from 15 on.

This does not mean that there are 40,000 more 'Dan' class individuals looking for love. Some are 15, some are 64. That means there's a wide range of ages in the single men (and women) categories. You have the raw data, but don't let it discourage you. 

Just keep doing the things you like, but keep an eye out for a woman who meets your standards (breathing, no obvious feathers) and is enjoying something you also like. Go up, strike up a conversation, and BAM, instant restraining order! That's how it always worked for me!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, you have failed to account for some critical demographic data.</p>
<p>Half your charts have the &#8216;over 65&#8242; crowd seperated, that means the remaining are 64 and under. The other chart has people from 15 on.</p>
<p>This does not mean that there are 40,000 more &#8216;Dan&#8217; class individuals looking for love. Some are 15, some are 64. That means there&#8217;s a wide range of ages in the single men (and women) categories. You have the raw data, but don&#8217;t let it discourage you. </p>
<p>Just keep doing the things you like, but keep an eye out for a woman who meets your standards (breathing, no obvious feathers) and is enjoying something you also like. Go up, strike up a conversation, and BAM, instant restraining order! That&#8217;s how it always worked for me!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wabewalker</title>
		<link>http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/#comment-2830</link>
		<dc:creator>Wabewalker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:26:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.nonmundane.org/archives/2007/06/27/more-information-about-why-im-single/#comment-2830</guid>
		<description>The other thing you don't have access to is a breakdown by age.  For the "Younger than 65" values the numbers are roughly the same; however, you'd have to break that down into finer-grained age categories, especially if you follow the ±20% rule.

A real geek (like one that wasted three years doing probabilistic pattern recognition) would calculate the probability of encountering someone desirable as a ratio of desirable_persons to total_population, and condition that on the likelihood that said target would be mutually attracted.

Of course, the conditional is extremely low because most women do not like to be objectified, and especially do not want to be objectified into a statistic.  Pray they do not do a Google search and find this entry.

Still, one has to relish the possible pick-up lines: "Hi baby. According to my calculations, we have a 76.4% chance of being mutually compatible.  Wanna check my figures?"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other thing you don&#8217;t have access to is a breakdown by age.  For the &#8220;Younger than 65&#8243; values the numbers are roughly the same; however, you&#8217;d have to break that down into finer-grained age categories, especially if you follow the ±20% rule.</p>
<p>A real geek (like one that wasted three years doing probabilistic pattern recognition) would calculate the probability of encountering someone desirable as a ratio of desirable_persons to total_population, and condition that on the likelihood that said target would be mutually attracted.</p>
<p>Of course, the conditional is extremely low because most women do not like to be objectified, and especially do not want to be objectified into a statistic.  Pray they do not do a Google search and find this entry.</p>
<p>Still, one has to relish the possible pick-up lines: &#8220;Hi baby. According to my calculations, we have a 76.4% chance of being mutually compatible.  Wanna check my figures?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
