I want to have a serious talk for a minute. Programmers are statistically way less likely to be married by the age of 25 than most other fields. Women are statistically more likely to find programmer men unattractive than most other fields.
I am hurting inside, lads. How can I fix myself? Should I give up coding to start a family?
Just byourselv.
Who says you need to be part of the statistics?
Go /out
ugly, socially outcast, people are more likely to be programmers. if you're average than being a programmer won't make you undesireable, it's just that more undesireable men are programmers. being in another career won't fix you, it will just make you less money.
This. It's just the beta male among fucking up the statistics
take a shower, hit the weights, get a clue
the careers that actually fuck you up romantically are the really low status ones, like garbage collector or similar. even if they pay well women will hate you for being low status. you can just call yourself an analyst or something instead of a programmer or just say where you work if you really feel strongly and women won't care since it's white collar and high enough status. but programmer is perfectly fine. it's not an advantage like being a lawyer or doctor, but it's comfy white collar work and won't put women off.
genuinely interested where you got these stats from
correlation over causation dumbass
this doesn't wave away the correlation though. A correlated with B means one of the 3 MUST be true.
A causes B
B causes A
C causes both A and B
correlation isn't causation but it is correlation. they're still highly related.
You forgot one:
C causes A and D causes B
which is really telling because it breaks down your entire point.
Go back
>there can only be three factors at play
>correlation must always imply causation
>implying a and b are correlated in the first place
that's logically the same as C causing A and B. the fact that this was beyond you shows you don't know shit about the subject. typical of the people who parrot "correlation doesn't mean causation."
Don't worry, you become a programmer because you're a creepy incel, not the other way around. The game was rigged from the start
Damn, you got me dude. Being a programmer literally inhibits your ability to get married. You've convinced me.
I never argued that, and again the fact that such a simple point has gone over your head is astounding
>Should I give up coding to start a family?
You want a serious talk? Living with women is a mistake. And it's one you're going to end up making anyways regardless of what I tell you now. Love is a lie. Don't be a fool.
>Should I give up coding to start a family?
No What I'm saying is you can code your own family
no you misunderstand. corellation doesn't mean one of those 'must' be true, it means there is a statistical likelyhood one of them is true. It could also be a complete coincidence.
fuck off, go read an intro to the topic. you either have a erroneous correlation or one, or a combination, of those 3 possibilities. pointing out that any statistical correlation "might be wrong" is a kindergarten level objection.
Married people are better off in nearly every metric than single people. Divorced people are much worse off though. That's the break.
You should take your own "advice" and read a fucking book you knuckle dragging mouth breathing troglodyte.
>A correlation between two variables is not a sufficient condition to establish a causal relationship (in either direction).
This board just gets more retarded by the second.
you're right it's not. because it can be any of those 3 and not one, that's why it doesn't automatically establish it. but it has to be one of them. absolute, absolute, retard. amazing.
My god you sound like an asshole. You keep trying to shit on other people's intelligence while making no valid points yourself. Go back to your farm town high school where you felt smart because you were better at math than a bunch of hill billies
>but it has to be one of them
it does. open any textbook. it has to be one of those or a combination. this is literally year one.
I'm quoting intro textbook level details while dealing with people who know fuck all.
Yeah, and doing a shitty job of explaining your thoughts and then being an asshole when you can barely sputter out "correlation means they're related somehow, which could possibly include causation."
I accurately explained the three possibilities that necessarily follow. it can be a combination of them. what you have done is say "nuh uh" and then get pissed off that I called you stupid when it went over your head. how about look it up.
Stop adopting the programmer "identity" that was exposed to you and that you confuse for your actual "self" (a nebulous term) and become somebody more interesting to others and, especially, women.
If you want women, become someone women want. There is no authenticity. That is an archaism. Coding doesn't require that you be fat, dress childishly, and talk too fast.
>Ice cream and sun protection cream sales go up in summer and down in summer so there must be a correlation between ice cream and sun protection cream
You should reread your book until you know the difference between dependence and statistical dependence you miserable arrogant cunt.
You're talking to a different user. I got your point. You clearly ripped it straight from a text book. It's a simple idea; correlation can include causation. You just explained using piss poor text book examples and then proceeded to hurl insults at people when you're not good at explaining. Ever consider woman don't like you, not because you're a computer nerd, but because you're an asshole?
masturbation is the answer. Most programmers are happy wankers. They never miss an opportunity to whack off. Dude be a wanker and b4e a programmer, married life is for people whose balls hardly work and for people who are so lame they need a wife to legitimise their existence
I'm a software engineer, I got married at 22. I'm gay so women aren't a problem for me.