undefined | Better HN

0 pointssaagarjha7y ago0 comments

Numbers don’t really say much unless you pin them to what they’re measuring: they might not be calibrated against a percentile. For example, on a linear scale with 0 being “horrendous” and 100 being “insanely attractive”, I’d rate most of the people I know much closer to 70 than a 50: the average person could stand to look a lot worse.

0 comments

4 comments · 1 top-level

bluntfang7y ago· 3 in thread

>Numbers don’t really say much unless you pin them to what they’re measuring

That's why it has the label "attractive"

simonh7y ago

Sigh, there's always one. The point is that's not a sufficiently clear definition of what's being measured. Someone I find attractive you might find unattractive, because it's a subjective attribute, so 'attractiveness' isn't an unambiguous description of what the algorithm is actually measuring.

johncolanduoni7y ago

If it’s a feature for making people who try your system at a trade show feel good about themselves as they said, it works best if it’s not measuring anything at all.

bluntfang7y ago

have you read the thread you're participating in?

I digress, surely naming is really hard. there's a sweet spot to hit short and sufficiently explanative. Perhaps this didn't hit it for you, but it probably did for the target audience, and if it didn't, they could call support for the product they paid for.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse