FabSwingers.com > Forums > Scotland > Data nerds - 6 degrees of sexual separation?
Data nerds - 6 degrees of sexual separation?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 .
A bit more breakdown showed the following:
Total number of accounts in the subset: 101,313
Breakdown of account type:
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| accountType --- | - Total | Percentage |
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| Man ------------- | 53,620 | --- 52.9251 |
| Couple ---------- | 29,913 | --- 29.5253 |
| Woman --------- | 13,370 | --- 13.1967 |
| TV/TS ---------- | -- 3,960 | --- 03.9087 |
| Couple (MM) -- | ---- 361 | --- 00.3563 |
| Couple (FF) --- | ------ 89 | --- 00.0878 |
+--------------------+----------+----------------+
(Just to emphasise, this may not be representative of the whole site, it's only the network of verifications of people who've verified people who've at some point verified us. That might be a tiny subset of the whole site.)
Total displayed verifications: 528,833
Meeting type:
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| meetingType ----- | Total --- | Percentage |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| Meeting in person | 498,884 | ---- 94.3368 |
| Webcam ---------- | -- 27,449 | ---- 05.1905 |
| Phone ------------- | --- 2,500 | ---- 00.4727 |
+-----------------------+------------+----------------+
Average number of displayed verifications per account: 5.22
Highest number of displayed verifications: 612 (chapeau!)
To answer the degrees of separation question, I used Edsger Dijkstra's Shortest Path algorithm (the same one a basic SatNav might use). Sadly we're not at 6 degrees yet - the longest shortest path (greatest direct distance between two accounts) was 12 hops, so there's still a lot of shagging to be done!
Please don't be worried about any of this, no personal information was collected, nothing's stored and certainly, beyond this post, nothing's published. Nothing can be tied back to any account or anyone, I just thought it might be interesting. Also... it all might be incorrect, my coding's pretty terrible  . I'm also not a statistician...
Please don't kill our account, Erin will never forgive me. The program doesn't do anything that couldn't be done automatically or even manually with a throwaway account. If anyone is worried, I'll never do anything like this again and I can delete the post.
Thanks for reading, challenge/ question my method at will. Apologies if this is woefully boring and nerdy  . | |||
 | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"Have you ever wondered whether Fab's big enough to satisfy the 6 degrees of sexual separation? I wanted a wee coding challenge to fill a day off work, so I wrote a program to try to calculate how connected we are. The design is pretty simple - it starts at our page and follows all our verification links, and their verification links, and their verification links and so on... to see how many different folk we're sexually connected to and how far removed. I could have gone with friend lists rather than verifications but verifications seemed like a more legitimate record of connection. From the set of verifications on one page, just following account links the program hadn't seen before (so no clicking on the same account twice ever), the program was able to reach 101,313 unique accounts .
A bit more breakdown showed the following:
Total number of accounts in the subset: 101,313
Breakdown of account type:
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| accountType --- | - Total | Percentage |
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| Man ------------- | 53,620 | --- 52.9251 |
| Couple ---------- | 29,913 | --- 29.5253 |
| Woman --------- | 13,370 | --- 13.1967 |
| TV/TS ---------- | -- 3,960 | --- 03.9087 |
| Couple (MM) -- | ---- 361 | --- 00.3563 |
| Couple (FF) --- | ------ 89 | --- 00.0878 |
+--------------------+----------+----------------+
(Just to emphasise, this may not be representative of the whole site, it's only the network of verifications of people who've verified people who've at some point verified us. That might be a tiny subset of the whole site.)
Total displayed verifications: 528,833
Meeting type:
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| meetingType ----- | Total --- | Percentage |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| Meeting in person | 498,884 | ---- 94.3368 |
| Webcam ---------- | -- 27,449 | ---- 05.1905 |
| Phone ------------- | --- 2,500 | ---- 00.4727 |
+-----------------------+------------+----------------+
Average number of displayed verifications per account: 5.22
Highest number of displayed verifications: 612 (chapeau!)
To answer the degrees of separation question, I used Edsger Dijkstra's Shortest Path algorithm (the same one a basic SatNav might use). Sadly we're not at 6 degrees yet - the longest shortest path (greatest direct distance between two accounts) was 12 hops, so there's still a lot of shagging to be done!
Please don't be worried about any of this, no personal information was collected, nothing's stored and certainly, beyond this post, nothing's published. Nothing can be tied back to any account or anyone, I just thought it might be interesting. Also... it all might be incorrect, my coding's pretty terrible . I'm also not a statistician...
Please don't kill our account, Erin will never forgive me. The program doesn't do anything that couldn't be done automatically or even manually with a throwaway account. If anyone is worried, I'll never do anything like this again and I can delete the post.
Thanks for reading, challenge/ question my method at will. Apologies if this is woefully boring and nerdy ."Haha!! This is brilliant!  | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"I think the 6 degrees can be achieved in smaller circles far more quickly than if you looked at the site as a whole. Purely because of logistics. For example if we were to take the Scottish forum. I reckon we could get it down to as short as 3 or 4... " Or 6-8 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Do you work for Sidney University? " If you do can. You pinch my photos. And use them for advertising purposes .everyone should get a look at. Gas | |||
| |||
 | |||
"Geek lol! 25% of people think that 60% of statistics are 52% useful "And 74.2% of statistics found on the Internet are made up; including this one. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Interesting, personally I feel someone with your skills should be utilised by designing or improving app platforms, incredible skill you have acquired, so useful to ensure efficiency and minimise waste in these times." Sorry, I should have said , I write computer programs for a living...
"I think the 6 degrees can be achieved in smaller circles far more quickly than if you looked at the site as a whole. Purely because of logistics. For example if we were to take the Scottish forum I reckon we could get it down to as short as 3 or 4..." Yeah, I suspect you're right. It's probably only so wide because of holiday meetups. Every time someone comes here on holiday or we go somewhere and hookup, the verification joins the two local networks and the graph could double. "Do you work for Sydney University?" Haha! I don't, promise! Everyone can stand down the teams of solicitors they all keep on retainer just in case . | |||
"You are deffinately in need of a good seeing to "We'll both need to sort him out. That hurt my brain and I'm frazzled enough without all that! Bx | |||
| |||
"So there's only 5 men to every woman on here? that's interesting to know, people are always asking the ratio of guys to ladies on here." Only by verification. There are 5 times as many verifications left by men than by women (in this subset). It's probably not representative of the membership ratios unless we could assume the same number of men and women proportionally meet and equally as often. | |||
"So there's only 5 men to every woman on here? that's interesting to know, people are always asking the ratio of guys to ladies on here. Only by verification. There are 5 times as many verifications left by men than by women (in this subset). It's probably not representative of the membership ratios unless we could assume the same number of men and women proportionally meet and equally as often." I actually understood less then i thought i did, lol. I get what you mean now though, thanks. Plus not everyone verifies either and that would need taking into account also? | |||
"Have you ever wondered whether Fab's big enough to satisfy the 6 degrees of sexual separation? I wanted a wee coding challenge to fill a day off work, so I wrote a program to try to calculate how connected we are. The design is pretty simple - it starts at our page and follows all our verification links, and their verification links, and their verification links and so on... to see how many different folk we're sexually connected to and how far removed. I could have gone with friend lists rather than verifications but verifications seemed like a more legitimate record of connection. From the set of verifications on one page, just following account links the program hadn't seen before (so no clicking on the same account twice ever), the program was able to reach 101,313 unique accounts .
A bit more breakdown showed the following:
Total number of accounts in the subset: 101,313
Breakdown of account type:
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| accountType --- | - Total | Percentage |
+--------------------+---------+---------------+
| Man ------------- | 53,620 | --- 52.9251 |
| Couple ---------- | 29,913 | --- 29.5253 |
| Woman --------- | 13,370 | --- 13.1967 |
| TV/TS ---------- | -- 3,960 | --- 03.9087 |
| Couple (MM) -- | ---- 361 | --- 00.3563 |
| Couple (FF) --- | ------ 89 | --- 00.0878 |
+--------------------+----------+----------------+
(Just to emphasise, this may not be representative of the whole site, it's only the network of verifications of people who've verified people who've at some point verified us. That might be a tiny subset of the whole site.)
Total displayed verifications: 528,833
Meeting type:
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| meetingType ----- | Total --- | Percentage |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| Meeting in person | 498,884 | ---- 94.3368 |
| Webcam ---------- | -- 27,449 | ---- 05.1905 |
| Phone ------------- | --- 2,500 | ---- 00.4727 |
+-----------------------+------------+----------------+
Average number of displayed verifications per account: 5.22
Highest number of displayed verifications: 612 (chapeau!)
To answer the degrees of separation question, I used Edsger Dijkstra's Shortest Path algorithm (the same one a basic SatNav might use). Sadly we're not at 6 degrees yet - the longest shortest path (greatest direct distance between two accounts) was 12 hops, so there's still a lot of shagging to be done!
Please don't be worried about any of this, no personal information was collected, nothing's stored and certainly, beyond this post, nothing's published. Nothing can be tied back to any account or anyone, I just thought it might be interesting. Also... it all might be incorrect, my coding's pretty terrible . I'm also not a statistician...
Please don't kill our account, Erin will never forgive me. The program doesn't do anything that couldn't be done automatically or even manually with a throwaway account. If anyone is worried, I'll never do anything like this again and I can delete the post.
Thanks for reading, challenge/ question my method at will. Apologies if this is woefully boring and nerdy ."Utterly brilliant. | |||
| |||
If I check single males and single females within a 5 mile radius from me it comes to 8.3 men for every female.
Not sure if this is the same in Glasgow or Edinburgh (my area is quite scarcely populated). I'll check that tomorrow, since it's past my bedtime.
Sweet dreams x | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
