More importantly does that mean people can be ordered by that and can we construct a binary search tree to find anyone with a specific value of gay within O(log_2(n)) time?
If and only if you can define “gay” on a one dimensional axis, otherwise it would be like plotting points on an N-dimensional graph, I’m pretty sure “gay” is a multiple dimensions thing.
There is at least a time component to consider, as you might feel gayer some days than others. It likely also depends on your company, that is, if you are around a lot of hot men who are open to the idea of gay relations but not many hot women interested in you, you might feel gayer than if it were the other way around. So by sorting the population you would skew the amount of gay in a population by grouping gay people around gayer people and not as gay people with the even less gay.
Yes, but also, how do we consider aro/ace people, or people who are one but not the other, or gender non-conforming people, or people, or people who are a mix, this is an N-dimensional problem
More importantly does that mean people can be ordered by that and can we construct a binary search tree to find anyone with a specific value of gay within O(log_2(n)) time?
If and only if you can define “gay” on a one dimensional axis, otherwise it would be like plotting points on an N-dimensional graph, I’m pretty sure “gay” is a multiple dimensions thing.
So sadly we wont be getting a
tree: BinaryTree<Person> = BinaryTree::new_sorted_by(order_gayest);anytime soon 😒
Surely you’d need a non-binary tree?
Bruh i wish, 2-3 trees or anything of the sort probably won’t help us 😔
✨ The Forest of Gay ✨
There is at least a time component to consider, as you might feel gayer some days than others. It likely also depends on your company, that is, if you are around a lot of hot men who are open to the idea of gay relations but not many hot women interested in you, you might feel gayer than if it were the other way around. So by sorting the population you would skew the amount of gay in a population by grouping gay people around gayer people and not as gay people with the even less gay.
Yes, but also, how do we consider aro/ace people, or people who are one but not the other, or gender non-conforming people, or people, or people who are a mix, this is an N-dimensional problem