The original problem is stable ‘matching’ which used ‘marriage’ as an example iirc.

I’m sure dating apps use plenty of such algorithms and match profiles based on ranking. Like the number of women going out with a shorter guy for example would be quite low on apps because their matching preference would be taller men which can be inferred from their swipes.

The article suggests a rather arrogant tone or maybe frustrated one to defy odds somehow ?

The key thing to note is that take your chances, shoot your shot and don’t take rejections personal.

> especially when it’s taught by Anant Sahai, who’s a delightfully classic hardass immigrant professor ...

That's a rather odd way to begin an article. I understand the contributions of immigrant and temporarily-immigrant skilled professionals, I have been the latter myself, and yet this grates a little.

If one wants to express gratitude or compliments, I think there are better ways.

This article takes the stable marriage problem, a mathematical problem for which one of the resolution strategies is optimal for the side that is processed first, and concludes by analogy that "asking first" is an optimal strategy in real life, using anecdotal evidence as proof. Not sure how this made it to the front page, to be honest.

The bigger issue though is Kantian ethics. People don't have a reductionist value that enables ordering. There are unique qualities, gotchas, and je ne sais quoi for each between two people. Love also isn't a math problem, it's irrational and somewhat involuntary. Good luck to people who approach dating like hiring an employee rather than a desire to be mutually better together.

Obligatory: https://xkcd.com/55/