Thursday, October 20, 2016

Why Mark Brooks from OPW is wrong when he says

"I don't think people want to put the time into creating a profile or answering 200 questions. They want to have it be fairly effortless. So, as I look further into the future, I think computers and all these apps we're putting little pieces of ourselves into, that we are allowing to get to know us better, they should feed into a central character profiler.  Look at systems like Acxiom, which is a huge marketing database that has a lot of information gathered over the years about individuals, and companies likes Google that have also positioned themselves to know us very well. Ultimately, I think single people will demand more because they don't want to fall in love with the wrong person. So, the value will be there for them to work with the leading dating services and give them more information that will help them do better with compatibility profiling."

More information adds DISTORTION and cannot do better.

Please see:

eHarmony fights gamification with focus on ‘holy grail of dating’

Some fresh data from Alexa about major online dating sites in USA and CA

Very easy to copycat eHarmony, but very difficult to innovate: a 100 times better algorithm than eHarmony.

article: "Algorithms of the heart: can our all-new Wallflower* app add to the online dating buzz?"

If Viaan Studios, an independent AAA game developer in India, plans to copycat eHarmony?

Indian based online gaming company that plans to copycat .... eHarmony! They think they can use 16PF test in a game.

The key to long-lasting romance; COMPATIBILITY is: STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY and not "meet other people with similar interests".  

Please read: The 8 tips to innovate in the Online Dating Industry!
The Secret Sauce Behind Online Dating ? There is no one yet!

The Online Dating Industry does not need a 10% improvement, a 50% improvement or a 100% improvement. It does need "a 100 times better improvement"

 All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.

See How LIFEPROJECT METHOD calculates similarity between quantized patterns using an adapted quantum mechanics math equation same as "Teller Ulam design".

LIFEPROJECT METHOD is like the "Teller Ulam design" for the Online Dating Industry.
In this case 100 times more powerful than actual matching algorithms.

Not 100% better, 100 TIMES better

The idea of a thermonuclear fusion bomb ignited by a smaller fission bomb was first proposed by Enrico Fermi to his colleague Edward Teller in 1941 at the start of what would become the Manhattan Project.
Other prominent scientists openly recommended building nuclear bombs more powerful than the standard pure-fission model. Their assumption was that critical mass considerations would limit the potential size of fission explosions, but that a fusion explosion could be as large as its supply of fuel, which has no critical mass limit.
In January 1951, Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam invented radiation-powered ablation-drive implosion.
The Teller–Ulam design is the nuclear weapon design concept used in most of the world's multi-megaton-range thermonuclear weapons;  a 1,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima's Little Boy. In most applications the bulk of its destructive energy comes from uranium fission, not hydrogen/deuterium/tritium fusion!

Its essential features, which officially remained secret for nearly three decades, are:
1) separation of stages into a triggering "primary" explosive and a much more powerful "secondary" explosive
2) compression of the secondary by X-rays coming from nuclear fission in the primary, a process called the "radiation implosion" of the secondary,
3) heating of the secondary, after cold compression, by a second fission explosion inside the secondary.

No comments:

Post a Comment