Do you think it is possible that an algorithm can find your true love?

No.

But more because I think true love does not exist.Well, not the way many people think about it…

Based on a person’s character traits, you can basically look for someone else who has matching traits to reinforce and complement each other.If they find each other then that is already a form of love. And that doesn’t have to be romantic love immediately.

Think of Quora, for example, where you’ve fixed a few others to your favourites because they give beautiful, clear answers to the questions you ask.And they will gladly answer your questions again. This is actually a form of love because your curiosity requires their knowledge. A kind of mutual love, actually. Well, without the sex because that doesn’t have to be.

You will get true love if you have above all those loves one that has the most preference for you.That’s the true for as long as it lasts. Because there may be another one with even better answers and you get looked forward to your old true love. And was it true love if you so easily choose a different love?

Many people who marry do this because they think they have found the true love.But later they will divorce again because the true love is not what they have hoped for. But if it wasn’t true love, what was it?

So yes, you can think of algorithms that make people come closer to others who are like-minded.Or that complement someone. There can be someone in between who becomes true love. At least, until another true love comes forward…

Apart from that ‘ true love ‘: An algorithm will do in part what you do even though.Surprisingly many people continue to look for a loving within certain age limits, the same socio-economic class, the same training class, the same leisure/hobby-class etc. Surprisingly many second children marry a second child-there are all sorts of algorithms that you apply even though.

An algorithm can help narrow your o so large choice field.It can be best helpful. But algorithms have no sense of love. You have to do that yourself.

Just the assumptions we have to make for this.

First of all, the assumption that true love exists.Then the assumption that true love is predictable. Then the assumption that we can recognize all the variables that make this true love predictable. Then the assumption that an algorithm of true love is a decidable problem. Then the assumption that we get all the data collected (7 billion possibilities with all a presumably large amount of data points) and we can give a reasonable conclusion on the basis of all this data.

I do not believe so much in the existence of a true love.I believe that true love is workable if you have the trouble. In addition, there are so many variables that a match can never be 100% and even if it could be 100%, it is only the question if anyone exists in the world. The fact that we are talking about an algorithm already makes a hurry that or “fate determined” and then an algorithm has nothing to say about it, or that by the amount of data points the whole becomes a statistical game with approximations.

All in all, an impossible task and a number of conflicting theorems and assumptions.I’m guessing so of not.

The computer must have access to the relevant data.

If we ever get so that everyone drawed Google Glass or something similar bars, it would be best to create a statistical model that can predict the success of a potential relationship.Probably not a 100% accurate prediction, but fixed much better than pure gamble, and perhaps better than the intuition of the modal man.

But the challenge lies mainly in gathering relevant data.

In face recognition, a number of points in the face seem to be crucial.These are quite certain points in the face. Not obvious points such as the pupils and the corners of the mouth, but some points on the eyebrows, forehead and cheeks.

By looking at your ‘ likes ‘ on Facebook one also seems to be able to predict a lot about you.Political preference, sexual orientation, whether you are vegetarian, etcetera.

By also studying intensive groups of friends and partners on the basis of their likes and possibly a number of other traits, one can find all sorts of clusters of well-successful relationships and clusters of bad relationships.

The own body odor also seems to play a role in partner choice, but it can best be indirectly in the likes.

This type of information will allow many people to predict whether they feel good at home.Good intelectual, sexual, emotional and cultural match. It is not a match in which you feel so good that you do not know how to deal with it, no you can also handle it perfectly.

I think such an algorithm could greatly improve the partner choice.Now a partner is often second choice and derderangs, for lack of better.

I don’t think so, although many dating apps claim to be able to connect you with others who could fit your profile.

Yes.

Today, these algorithms are largely indicative (> 90% match may be possible, below which less, but still manual ‘ selection ‘ necessary), but I think that in the long term they can certainly evolve towards finding the best match.

It’s kinda similar to Google translate.In the beginning especially funny (but somewhere also useful), now largely understandable, and within 5 years may be as good or even better than a human translator.

In itself this is actually a pretty simple problem.If you know which factors contribute to a good relationship, and you have a database of people and the values that belong to those factors, then you can just match them.

Course.

Today may not be.There is too little conscience about all the factors that play a role.

If we look at KI (AI) algorithms, this is purely mathematics.A side effect is that the human brain is now getting much more attention. One tries to find out how one can let machines learn. What one now mentions is simply a huge amount of probability. We look at the memory, you have made recent discoveries about retrieving memories. Every time a reminder is fetched there are new connections. It turns out not to be just picking up, but definitely a change. It has been known for a long time that eyewitnesses often recall erroneous things that could possibly be explained by the fact that interrogations and remembering themselves, rewriting the memory, possibly a slightly modified version. There is an interesting Netflix documentary about this type of business where researchers never happened to successfully put things into someone’s head “plants”, only through conversing.

Why the preceding paragraph?Well, because they look rather often without the necessary insights into human behaviour. Love, infatuation and faithfulness are biologically explained. Emotions are indeed too explanatory, at present rudimentary but over a number of years we will know more and that continues until we can predict exactly how an emotion works.

In Disney World, where most of our fellow citizens live, it is indeed possible in the future to find a partner based on the factors that play a role.Unfortunately, this type of business will be developed to allow people to do something. Today this sort of thing is already used on dating websites, pay a subscription, talk to interesting but fake profiles, fake profiles that ask for money to write about,… There will be robot partners who do not have the disadvantages of a real human partner. And then what? I could think of it, but I fear that most people still live in the stage that love is a mystery and that a machine can never imitate it. So, best stop here.

Jean Paul Van Bendegem has once done a simple calculus.I did not immediately found a better link than this one:

Fourth Sweet is the true

It is not about ‘ your true love ‘, nor do I think that exists.

But at the chance of the best possible relationship?

Suppose a man in his life could have 10 relationships.Then what is the best strategy to get the best out of ten? (This is a pure chance to count)

The answer is: Break your first 3 relationships, and retain the next relationship that is at least as good as the best of the first 3.

Leave a Reply