Alpha and the 1%

The longer I write and participate in this space, the more I’ve come to appreciate the definition that Roissy came up with for Alpha years ago, a simple, quantitative, outcome oriented definition [1]. The reason why I’ve come to appreciate this more and more is that it strips away all the unnecessary veneers that men like to add and leaves us with a single question “How attractive is he to women?” because, quite frankly that is all most of us are trying to do, define what women find attractive in men, then help men cultivate those traits in themselves in order to improve their standing in the sexual market place.

This is also the source for most of my irritation with what I tend to deem “trad-cons”, “moralists” or other groups, that unfortunately made their way into this space due to a few manosphere staple authors deciding to launch side-hustles as political pundits. Namely, their muddying of the waters when it comes to alpha. Continue reading

Tinder and Automated Analytics

Earlier this week as I was logging entry number 3000 into my Tinder statistics I found myself going a bit up in levels of abstraction. The type of work I’m doing with the Tinder statistics is very detailed and looks into specific workings of the algorithms and systems that Tinder uses in order to make the app work. One of the recent developments is a little piece of legislation called the Global Data Protection Regulation (GDPR for short) that gives people the right to request the data that companies like Tinder and Facebook have collected on them. Thanks to this, a gentleman was able to request all the data Tinder had on him, and as a side-effect we figured out what data they track on every user.

The classical personal information such as name, email, age, and age bracket selected is not very interesting, what is interesting is that they track among others:

  • Your swipes (Right and left)
  • How many people who swipe left and right on you
  • Matches
  • Messages sent and received
  • Profile completeness

The reason why I found this interesting, is that if we start to reverse engineeer how Tinder works, those tracked data are the perfect tool for it. Odds are that Tinder also stores other “match related” things such as time spent looking at a profile before swiping, how many of the people you match with you actually have a conversation with, we know they track how often you get reported, and so on. This becomes important later.

If we think of Tinder and other apps as a bar, we all know what a bar has to do in order to do well (sportsbars and cigarbars excluded), and that is get a lot of hot girls in the door. If your bar has hot girls, the men will follow and buy them drinks. The girls are attracted to “how cool the bar is” the guys are attracted to “how hot the girls who think the bar is cool” are. From this perspective, we can thus outline the 3 major success criteria for Tinder:

A) Keep the girls happy

B) Maximize your user base

C) Keep the men around

Just like a bars revenue is based on a mixture of cover charges and drink sales, Tinder’s revenue is based on advertising, subscriptions to Plus and Gold, in addition to sales of consumables such as superlikes and boost. In the night club analogy, sending a girl a super-like is the equivalent of sending a girl a drink, a boost is equivalent to the club promoter shaking your hand and taking you to your reserved table with bottle service.

However, the most important man in the bar is the doorman, you see, his job is to:

A) Maintain a good mix of men and women

B) Keep the creeps out

C) Get rid of any troublemakers.

A bar without a solid doorman rapidly becomes a very unpleasant place to be. In the same way, Tinder has to walk a fine line between maintaining their female user-base, maximizing their user-base in general and maximizing the revenue from subscriptions and consumables (which I assume are mostly bought by men).  How does Tinder do this?

Continue reading

Levels of Game

I’m not sure where the idea that I’m fundamentally against long-term relationships in general and marriage in particular began. While it’s true that I’ve cautioned men against marriage in many essays over the 3 years that this blog has existed, I can’t remember ever having said “Never under any circumstances get into a long-term relationship”. I have probably said “Never get married”, for the simple reason that as far as risk and reward goes, you can gain the same benefits, without many of the downsides from cohabiting with a private contract between you, or alternatively with a private marriage (a marriage without getting the state involved.

Once you have children with a woman, you are exposed to the legal system in terms of child support, and various other payments anyway, but a private marriage or cohabitation with separate finances can help build a wall that keeps an ex away from your assets. I’m of the position that once you have children, it’s your duty to support and raise them. Few men want to stop their children from having access to the opportunities presented by resources, what they do want is their former partner having as little financial influence over them, something that can easily be granted by modern family courts. I’d wager that most men would prefer their money going towards the betterment of their children, rather than to as financiers of their former partner’s hunt for a new mate.

However, to return to topic, the reason why I’ve argued a position that men should avoid monogamous long-term relationships in general and marriage in particular, is that I’m observing many young men seeking to cash out of the sexual market place early, influenced by the idea that if they find a “quality woman”, often cited as being young, nurturing, low notch-count, from a good family and so on, they can get out of the SMP and live the trad life. Meaning one man, one woman, one family, under god, or something like that. This is not the case at all. If I held the position that men in monogamous, long-term relationships were the antithesis of a red pill men, I would not have participated in quite a few podcasts where a majority of the men I appeared with are in monogamous long-term relationships. Rollo holds the record with what I believe is a 21 year marriage, going on 22 years, however Donovan and Rian are also in long-term monogamous relationships.

For much of history, men and women did not get married because they were in love, they got married because the man needed someone to tend house, bear his children, and make his life easier, the woman needed a man to finance her life and protect her. This makes marriage into a need, rather than a want. Men had one set of needs to which a wife was a perfect solution. Women had another set of needs to which a husband was the perfect solution. However, as marriage shifted from being a need “I need someone to put food on the table and a roof over my head” to “I want someone who makes me happy”, the social dynamics that surrounded the couple were also one in which for the most part the needs of society was aligned with the needs of the men and women. It was not an optimal solution for any of them, but it was the best one available. One that curtailed the worst excesses of female sexual strategy and the worst excesses of male sexual strategy.

In the previous “needs based” sexual market place with strict regulations on divorce, remarriage and so on, the entire structure was such that once a man locked down a woman, he was free to focus on other non-SMP related activities, mainly contributing to society. In that sense, the old school marriage was a lot like a job back in the day, once you were hired you were hired for life. Modern marriage is a lot more like being an independent contractor or consultant, you are hired on a temporary basis unless you can make yourself indispensable. My position is simply that there is an illusion being sold that once you “lock her down”, start living your trad lifestyle and have kids, you are out of the sexual market place and are free. This is not the case. It may have been the case back in the day, when the social group around a married couple had skin in the game, where they were married as an alliance between families, or as a practical partnership to achieve goals outside of the marriage. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: The 3 Part Stack

**A Note**

First off, I know I haven’t been around much, I have a lot of things going on in my life at the moment, and I’m finding it very challenging to juggle everything. I hope to get back to writing more frequently in the coming months once things start to settle down.

**Note end**

With computers, we can break down the functioning into 3 parts, there is the hardware and firmware, these are the actual physical components of the machine bundled with the basic software that is loaded on them to make them work. Firmware generally consists of permanent software loaded onto read-only memory, and most frequently it’s not changed for the lifetime of the system.

Then there is the operating system, the operating system is a software program loaded onto the machine that makes it easier to work with than typing instructions in machine code into a command line interface. It also manages the computer hardware and the resources available to the machine between various programs.The operating system can be altered, upgraded, changed or even swapped out for another operating system, but doing so can have big consequences in terms of both performance and usability. It also tends to take a bit of time.

Finally, we have the apps, these are smaller programs that we install and run on the operating system in order to accomplish tasks of varying specificity. They can range from simple command line interfaces to entire suites of statistics and analysis software, games, word processors or the likes. These are fairly easy to install or remove, but they have varying learning curves and influences the firmware and operating system in various ways.

Between the 3 areas, there is somewhat of a bidirectional influence, in that the lower layers (firmware and hardware) influence what you can do with  the OS and apps. The firmware limits what you can do with the OS to some degree. They all influence each other, but not to the same degree. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Regulations and The SMP

As I was polishing another essay, an idea stuck in my head. What is the consequence of men widely adopting red pill theory as a framework for their lives and especially in intersexual dynamics. A major argument from the “Trad-con” and “Purple-pill” contingents within the manosphere has been that if men adopt a red pill perspective, and start implementing this into their lives, is that it will send society into a negative spiral. The logic goes that game and the red pill works in terms of getting laid, the result of a majority of men implementing a male sexual strategy (unlimited access to unlimited sexuality) at the cost of the female sexual strategy (alpha fucks/beta bucks) will lead to and hasten the decline of our current social order.I agree with this argument, as our overt social order for the past 50 – 300 years is based on the model of reproductive Marxism.

Monogamous marriage, no sex outside of marriage, no divorce, children are raised in a nuclear family with their mother as primary caregiver, and supported by the father through labor. This is the old book of rules made explicit. The changes that have been made in the past since the sexual revolution is that contraception is now widely available thus decoupling sex from reproduction. Divorce is now very available and has an entire industry supporting it. The proportion of children born and raised out by a single parent is increasing. Women are steadily increasing in labor participation and men are steadily declining in labor participation. The entire structure around monogamous marriage has been eroded, the man’s authority is gone, and what is left is a woman holding all the cards in her hand.

Let me begin by stating explicitly, trad-con has a problem with the “Beta bucks” side of female sexual strategy, in fact most of them support it wholeheartedly and just want wives who nag less and fuck more. The problem comes with the “Alpha fucks” side, and the fact that these two strategies are influence each other, a woman’s successful execution of the former, defacto a poorer execution of the latter if a woman’s strategy cannot be optimized in the form of “Alpha bucks”. The goal of such men is primarily is to improve the Beta Bucks dynamic in a relationship, so that the Beta males are able to live happy, fulfilling relationships, and won’t end up with their wife divorcing them after 5 years of dead bedroom, not so much because it’s the best for the man, but because it’s the best trade-off for society. It keeps the man’s stomach full, balls empty and working hard, a woman’s wallet full, and the children’s lives stable.

In order to do this, the argument is that men have to sacrifice for their fellow men, by neglecting their own best reproductive interest and sexual strategy. It’s an argument in favor of why men should indulge female sexual strategy instead of following their own. Personally, I think the fear of “all men going alpha and the world turning into an orgy is unfounded due to natural regulatory mechanisms.

Continue reading

Of Fitness and Models

When we get into statistics, a major issue that we deal with is how well a model fits the data. We refer to this as “Goodness of fit” and what it represents is usually a summary of the differences between observed values and expected values. The reason for doing such tests is to gauge how well our model works to explain the observations.

This could be as simple as the relationship between the independent variable (the one which we control or change) and the dependent variable (the one on which the effect of changes in the independent variable is seen), to complex multivariate analyses which attempt to gauge the effect of multiple variables on a single variable.

Models are means to an end, they are the extension of a theory, and work to test how well that theory fits reality. They represent our hypothesis of cause and effect, based on the theory we have formulated about how something works. To give an example, if we wanted to know if there is a relationship between number of repetitions affect hypertrophy, we would formulate 2 hypotheses:

Null-hypothesis – There is no relationship between number of repetitions and muscle hypertrophy

Hypothesis 1 – There is a relationship between number of repetitions and muscle hypertrophy

We would then conduct an experiment where we take a sample, have them perform a given number of repetitions across a period of time at a frequency held constant, and then measure the change between the start of the experiment and the end of the experiment. From this we get an answer of whether the independent variable (number of repetitions) affects the dependent variable (hypertrophy). The results of this experiment could then be validated, replicated and serve as a foundation for future research into hypertrophy.

This research, and future research can then serve to guide us when we are aiming to gain more muscle so that we find the most efficient route between point A and point B. We began with a question “How does number of repetitions affect muscle hypertrophy“, we did our research, formulated a theory and then tested that theory in an experiment, the results of which are utilized to amend our model of reality, which can then be tested again.

This is how most research works, a researcher starts by wanting to answer a question, does research into the question, based on the question a theory is formulated, this theory is tested through observation or experiment, and the results of said experiments are then integrated into the theory.

Our goal when conducting research is to generate mind-independent information, meaning that human minds constantly generate cause and effect hypotheses, then test them against reality. However, we are also prone to many errors of reasoning that lead us to believing in false relationships, a prime example being the superstitions of various athletes or sports-teams.

Continue reading

The Guide to Being a High T Alpha Male

Just let me make a few things very clear here, there are only 2 ways a long-term relationship can work, you are either a high-T dominant Alpha male or a low-T, soy beta cuck, there is absolutely no middle ground available in this equation. If you pick option A, you will have a girl who is always in line, never goes out of pocket, sacrifice constantly for you, molds herself perfectly after your lead, and will reward you with pornstar level sex 24 hours a day 365 days a year.

If you pick option B, you will have a nightmare girl who is constantly testing you, goes out of pocket on a minute by minute basis, demands that you mold your personality and life based on her whims. In return she will bang all your friends, regularly shoot videos for pornhub with high T alpha males and if you’re lucky you get star-fish duty sex once every 7 – 9 months… except when she has a headache, or is on her period, or just doesn’t feel like it.

I get that a lot of you men desire that deep connection with a woman, but you cannot have that deep connection with a woman, you can never let a girl know what you’re thinking or feeling, in fact if you at any point stop being a cocky & funny, aloof, distanced, dark triad man, who does nothing but eat steaks, hit on girls, run game, and lift weights, she will divorce you, take your kids, all your money, including your sex doll, before having the police put you away for 25 to life on a false accusation. If you cannot handle making your life about eating steaks, lifting weights, taking no breaks, constantly maintaining frame, making sure you take your TRT shots, your CBD oil and get 3 x 12 reps of heavy deadlifts in while waiting for your lambo to get out of the shop, you do not have what it takes to maintain a relationship with a woman in today’s sexual market place. Continue reading