posted December 14, 2012 09:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by RunAroundScreaming:
haha sometimes i wish i werent straight because then id have more options. not to mention girls are less promiscuous than guys. but darn im just not at all attracted to girls. LOL

---

posted December 14, 2012 09:11 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
It's possible for people to admire beauty without wanting to physically interact with it. Some men are better-looking than others, it's ridiculous for any guy to pretend that he can't see it.

I'm a Cap sun, Pisces moon (I say, for the millionth time here.) The women that I think are the most attractive tend to be Cap suns or Pisces suns. I don't mean to sound narcissistic...I think it's because I recognize their energy and want to emulate it more; plus I think if I met these women, we would understand each other at a deeper level. My best girl friends are already Cap suns and Pisces suns.

Attractive Cap sun women:
January Jones, Kate Middleton, Amanda Peet, Christy Turlington

Attractive Pisces women:
Jessica Biel, Carrie Underwood, Rihanna (when she's actually dressed)

---

Lol my boss used to say so and so were more handsome than the both of us.. I was like wait what? I didn't get the memo!

posted December 14, 2012 09:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sand:
God yes 1 very fine Sagittarius woman!

---

damn... straight, er bi... in my case... I'd jump through hoops for her any day!

mmmmnnn love Kate Beckinsale too~

she's a cheeky one... haha /drool

*dreamonlilmothy*
>.<;

posted December 14, 2012 10:13 AM            

Esp Tegan (the one on the left). Virgo twins, lesbians. Famous for their witty banters and mullets. lol
Her explanation of droopy eye syndrome brought me in tears while laughing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nStSQfvU9RA

On the other side of the coin is her..

posted December 14, 2012 10:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by RunAroundScreaming:
haha sometimes i wish i werent straight because then id have more options. not to mention girls are less promiscuous than guys. but darn im just not at all attracted to girls. LOL

---

posted December 14, 2012 10:29 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by violet7887:
yes, thats why it says there has to be an attraction and then you actually have to desire them. "hetrosexual" or "homosexual" define a persons sexuality. There are other things you can admire about a person. Expand you mind a little...or not if thats what fits you

---

posted December 14, 2012 10:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hera:
On the other side of the coin is her..

---

I was v v curious of Aries mars coz of her. Not my type but can't deny the sex appeal just oozes.

posted December 14, 2012 10:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sand:
^more women than men?

---

posted December 14, 2012 10:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
nope equal, the girls arent as innocent as they want you to believe.

---

If We Were All Better People The World Would Be A Better Place

Some of the power and meaning of game theory can be illustrated by assessing the statement "If we were all better people the world would be a better place." This may seem to you to be self-evidentally true. Or you may recognize that as a matter of logic this involves the fallacy of composition: just because a statement applies to each individual person it need not apply to the group. Game theory can give precise meaning to the statement of both what it means to be better people and what it means for the world to be a better place, and so makes it possible to prove or disprove the statement. In fact the statement is false, and this can be shown by a variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma.

Let us start with a variation on the Prisoner's Dilemma game we may call the Pride Game.

proud not confess confess
proud 4.0, 4.0 5.4, 3.6 1.2, 0.0
not confess 3.6, 5.4 5.0, 5.0 -4.0, 10.0
confess 0.0, 1.2 10.0, -4.0 1.0, 1.0

The Pride Game is like the Prisoner's Dilemma game with the addition of the new strategy of being proud. A proud individual is one who will not confess except in retaliation against a rat-like opponent who confesses. In other words, if I stand proud and you confess, I get 1.2, because we have both confessed and I can stand proud before your humiliation, but you get 0, because you stand humiliated before my pride. On the other hand, if we are both proud, then neither of us will confess, however, our pride comes at a cost, as we both try to humiliate the other, so we each get 4, rather than the higher value of 5 we would get if we simply chose not to confess. It would be worse, of course, for me to lose face before your pride by choosing not to confess. In this case, I would get 3.6 instead of 4, and you, proud in the face of my humiliation would get 5.4.

The Pride Game is very different than the Prisoner's Dilemma game. Suppose that we are both proud. In the face of your pride, if I simply chose not to confess I would lose face, and my utility would decline from 4 to 3.6. To confess would be even worse as you would retaliate by confessing, and I would be humiliated as well, winding up with 0. In other words, if we are both proud, and we each believe the other is proud, then we are each making the correct choice. Morever, as we are both correct, anything either of us learns will simply confirm our already correct beliefs. This type of situation - where players play the best they can given their beliefs, and they have learned all there is to learn about their opponents' play is called by game theorists a Nash Equilibrium.

Notice that the original equilibrium of the Prisoner's Dilemma confess-confess is not an equilibrium of the Pride game: if I think you are going to confess, I would prefer to stand proud and humiliate you rather than simply confessing myself.

Now suppose that we become "better people." To give this precise meaning take this to mean that we care more about each other, that is, we are more altruistic, more generous. Specifically, let us imagine that because I am more generous and care more about you, I place a value both on the utility I receive in the "selfish" game described above and on the utility received by you. Not being completely altruistic, I place twice as much weight on my own utility as I do on yours. So, for example, if in the original game I get 3 units of utility, and you get 6 units of utility, then in the new game in which I am an altruist, I get a weighted average of my utility and your utility. I get 2/3 of the 3 units of utility that belonged to me in the original "selfish" game, and 1/3 of the 6 units of utility that belonged to you in the "selfish" game. Overall I get 4 units of utility instead of 3. Because I have become a better more generous person, I am happy that you are getting 6 units of utility, and so this raises my own utility from the selfish level of 3 to the higher level of 4. The new game with altruistic players is described by taking a weighted average of each player's utility with that of his opponent, placing 2/3 weight on his own utility and 1/3 weight on his opponent's. This gives the payoff matrix of the Altruistic Pride Game

proud not confess confess
proud 4.00, 4.00 4.8, 4.20* 0.80, 0.40
not confess 4.20*, 4.80 5.00, 5.00 0.67, 5.33*
confess 0.40, 0.80 5.33*, 0.67 1.00*, 1.00*
What happens? If you are proud, I should choose not to confess: if I were to be proud I get a utility of 4, while if I choose not to confess I get 4.2, and of course if I do confess I get only 0.4. Looking at the original game, it would be better for society at large if when you are proud I were to choose not to confess. This avoids the confrontation of two proud people, although of course, at my expense. However, as an altruist, I recognize that the cost to me is small (I lose only 0.4 units of utility) while the benefit to you is great (you gain 1.4 units of utility), and so I prefer to "not confess." This is shown in the payoff matrix by placing an asterisk next to the payoff 4.2 in the proud column.

What should I do if you choose not to confess? If I am proud, I get 4.8, if I choose not to confess I get 5, but if I confess, I get 5.33. So I should confess. Again, this is marked with an asterisk. Finally, if you confess, then I no longer wish to stand proud, recognizing that gaining 0.2 by humiliating you comes at a cost of 1 to you. If I choose not to confess I get only 0.67. So it is best for me to confess as well.

What do we conclude? It is no longer an equilibrium for us both to be proud. Each of us in the face of the other's pride would wish to switch to not confessing. Of course it is also not an equilibrium for us both to choose not to confess: each of us would wish to switch to confessing. The only equilibrium is the box marked with two asterisks where we are both playing the best we can given the other player's play: it is where we both choose to confess. So far from making us better off, when we both become more altruist and more caring about one another, instead of both getting a relatively high utility of 4, the equilibrium is disrupted, and we wind up in a situation in which we both get a utility of only 1. Notice how we can give a precise meaning to the "world being a better place." If we both receive a utility of 1 rather than both receiving a utility of 4, the world is clearly a worse place.

The key to game theory and to understanding why better people may make the world a worse place is to understand the delicate balance of equilibrium. It is true that if we simply become more caring and nothing else happens the world will at least be no worse. However: if we become more caring we will wish to change how we behave. As this example shows, when we both try to do this at the same time, the end result may make us all worse off.

To put this in the context of day-to-day life: if we were all more altruistic we would choose to forgive and forget more criminal behavior. The behavior of criminals has a complication. More altruistic criminals would choose to commit fewer crimes. However, as crime is not punished so severely, they would be inclined to commit more crimes. If in the balance more crimes are committed, the world could certainly be a worse place. The example shows how this might work.

posted December 14, 2012 10:44 AM            

Monica belluci is really beautiful http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/14100000/Monica-Bellucci-monica-bellucci-14168862-1600-1200.jpg

posted December 14, 2012 04:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
nope equal, the girls arent as innocent as they want you to believe.

---

posted December 14, 2012 04:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sand:
Lol my boss used to say so and so were more handsome than the both of us.. I was like wait what? I didn't get the memo!

I like sienna miller and Melanie Laurent.

---

Was your boss a guy, commenting on other men?

For the record, I'm not a lesbian at all...no memo ever went out!

posted December 14, 2012 05:07 PM            

and Samantha James (Gemini), beautiful, pure, and elegant. Her music always puts me at ease
her Venus sextiles my Venus exact

posted December 14, 2012 05:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:

---

posted December 14, 2012 05:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sand:
^penthouse playmate?

---

posted December 14, 2012 07:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyVirgo1979:
Hmm...ok if I weren't straight, it would totally be alyssa milano. I used to watched reruns of charmed back when I had cable and she just oozes sex appeal and her character was so funny and yet so sweet. She was my favorite character on that show I'm too passive so id hafta go for someone with fire energy. Even tho with females I don't get along with fire signs too well for some reason. But with men that's kinda what I'm drawn to. My best female friend is a scorpio and her and I get along great but if I was les I wouldn't dare date a scorpio lol id b too terrified they'd kill me in my sleep

---

posted December 14, 2012 07:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Was your boss a guy, commenting on other men?

For the record, I'm not a lesbian at all...no memo ever went out!

Sienna Miller is cool, dunno who Melanie is, I'll look her up.

---