h a l f b a k e r yBunned. James Bunned.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Put in your stats, height, looks ranking (whatever that is) BMI, financials, personality ranking (again, whatever that is) and see how many guys above your rank would have to get hit by some cataclysmic event for you to have Mila Kunis (or some other famous beautiful person) knock on your door and say
"Are you busy Saturday night?"
Works great for women who wonder about their chances with famous men as well.
"I'm number 4 billion with Mila, but only 3 billion guys above me for Jennifer Aniston? I like those odds!"
hahaha
https://www.youtube...watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Nov 25 2014]
stop it, stop-it I'm gonna pee
https://www.youtube...watch?v=ES96nV5QzJM
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Nov 27 2014]
https://www.youtube...watch?v=twG_ccsz9OQ
[NSFW] version of above. Scroll to 1:45. [2 fries shy of a happy meal, Nov 27 2014]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
Does it take the celebrity's actual preference into account,
and if so, what is that based off of? |
|
| |
And does it select only from the population that is using the
service, or some sort of worldwide extrapolation? |
|
| |
Regardless, this would probably work better as an adjunct
to a dating site (I'm thinking OKCupid), where the
personality information, at least, already exists. |
|
| |
"whatever that is" seems rather critical to this, er, invention. |
|
| |
Objection! Choices likely to be made after a global
disaster, especially one of apocalyptic proportions,
will not take into account many social moores of the
present. For example obesity could be a sign of
wealth and financial markets would be in such ruin as
to make present forms of currency useless. The scale
would therefore need a specific type of presumed
disaster. Furthermore its ranking would scale along a
geometric curve or even change to a complex curve. |
|
| |
//Does it take the celebrity's actual preference into account, and if so, what is that based off of?// |
|
| |
Yea, you'd either get them to fill out a dating style questioner, or better yet, just go by what they've had in the past. |
|
| |
So for Jennifer Aniston for instance I'd be ranked against Brad Pitt. |
|
| |
Brad Pitt: Starred in Thelma and Louise, had one scene with his shirt off where he was totally ripped. |
|
| |
Doctorremulac3: Saw Thelma and Louise, on occasion has taken a shirt off because it was ripped. Match of .004%. |
|
| |
//"whatever that is" seems rather critical to this, er, invention.// |
|
| |
I just come up with the ideas, let the eggheads in product development work out the kinks. |
|
| |
//let the eggheads in product development work out the kinks // |
|
| |
We hate you, and hope you die in a slow, prolonged and excruciatingly
painful way, starting now. |
|
| |
No, cancel that. We don't want you to die, just endure continuous
unbearable suffering for as long as possible, so that you actually want
to die, but it doesn't happen. And we hope there is an afterlife, so you
can go on suffering there, or better reincarnation, so we can track you
down and make you suffer some more. |
|
| |
It all depends on who the other 6,356 are going to be,
surely? |
|
| |
This is the kind of thing I like thinking about. But I I think you have to start from the consumptive capacities of both females, on a reasonable and most accommodating end I'd imagine each girl would be capable of dalliance with one male every day for 50 years, that's 18000 men approximately. So the big number is 3.5billion men and the small number is the consumptive capacity of the person. I'd imagine that for Jennifer Anistons and Mila Kunis' statistics is not really the most predictive methodology. Correspondence with them would relate to a very specific set of of qualities, and a relatively small consumptive capacity, so a qualitative approach. There is actually an in between way of thinking that doesn't require statistical calculation or qualitative profiling, its simply a determination between how statistical and how qualitative a person is. For example I'm sensitive to this because I'm not in any way a statistical person. The value 1 is my main factorial. Other people are statistical always focused on how many people, but they might be too dumb to handle that etc. Then there is the qualitative side that relates to semiotics, because some people may like certain qualities but they can't identify them with certainty, so the statistical consideration is how possible it is to persuade qualitatively, and increase statistical consumption of the person. For example someone might discern that I am a statistical person, when I say that I'm not, but the entire profile of a statistical person relates from everything from biopower and biopolitics to crunching numbers, and statists, so you does the math. |
|
| |
//We hate you, and hope you die in a slow, prolonged
and excruciatingly painful way, starting now.// |
|
| |
Sounds good, I'll expect a status report by Friday. |
|
| |
P.S. No time to actually read your memo, late for
golf. |
|
| |
Also are you assuming targeted die off, or proportional?
(Meaning, is this a strict ranking of where you fall in the
celebrity's preferences, or what percentage of the total
population has to die before you are statistically likely to be
the best remaining choice?) |
|
| |
If it's the latter, the numbers are going to be consistently
very low, because the odds of getting everyone who's a
better match than you at random are not good. |
|
| |
A targeted die-off makes more sense, as dense cities are more likely to be targets, and the income factor there is likely to be highly skewed against rural areas. |
|
| |
The future of the human race lies somewhere in the backwoods of the bayou, far far away from any civilization. |
|
| |
The sadder part is that this has probably happened many times. |
|
| |
I admit, I haven't given a great deal of thought
to how the competing suitors might actually snuff it. |
|
| |
Good news, [doctor r3]; all 3,837,654,309 men ahead of you in the queue for Mila Kunis were killed in the aftermath of the recent asteroid strike. Unfortunately, so was Ms Kunis. |
|
| |
You know, that brings up another point. No guarantee
that the gal's gonna be in the mood ya
know? |
|
| |
(Shows up to smoking remains of her mansion with
flowers and box of chocolates) "Hi Ms Kunis, first let
me express my condolences that everybody you've
ever loved have been wiped out. Anyhoo, you don't
know me but I've been scientifically chosen to be
your
perfect match... well... under the circumstances
anyway. Oh, you want the chocolate but not the
flowers? Ok... (SLAM!) Ms Kunis? (knock knock knock)
Ms Kunis?" |
|
| |
Re: "stop it, stop-it I'm gonna pee" link. |
|
| |
Stay safe out there everyone! |
|
| |
/Re: "stop it, stop-it I'm gonna pee" link./ |
|
| |
The movie This is the End touches on this topic when Emma Watson is one of the only remaining women on Earth.
Your comment; // No guarantee that the gal's gonna be in the mood ya know?// reminded me of it. |
|
| |
Completely raunchy humor but that scene made me laugh so hard I missed most what happened next in the show. I posted a more in depth [link]. If you are at work DO NOT turn up the volume. |
|
| |
Ahhh, got it. I thought one of us had gone crazy and
was hoping it wasn't me. |
|
| |
Fully understandable. The third link was longer than I wanted and does not contain the brief vignette sequence of the second link that cracked me up during the movie. Parts of that film parallel this idea and I thought maybe you'd seen it. |
|
| |