Logo
DiS Needs You: Save our site »
  • DiScover Diron Animal about 4 hours ago
  • The Damned - Evil Spirits 3 days ago
  • Slug - HiggledyPiggledy 3 days ago
  • Christina Vantzou - No. 4 4 days ago
  • The Fangasm: The Midnight Organ Fight by Frightened Rabbit 4 days ago
  • Laura Veirs - The Lookout 6 days ago
  • Eels - The Deconstruction 6 days ago
  • A Place To Bury Strangers - Pinned 6 days ago
  • Logo_home2
  • Records
  • In Depth
  • In Photos
  • Blog
  • Podcast
  • Search
  • Community
  • Records
  • In Depth
  • Blog
  • Community

Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !

Boards

Music Social More…

user ages:

alcxxk [Edit] [Delete] 56 replies 04:11, 25 March '05
age: number of users

14: 471
15: 772
16*: 1094
17: 1031
18*: 1191
19: 887
20: 796
21: 792
22: 660
23: 648
24: 677

*= ages at which names beginning with "-" are particulalr common

no disrespect is meant to anyone outside of the 14-24 age bracket, but you can imagine numbers dwindle in both directions.


before you ask, this took about 6 minutes, and i found it interesting.
Share on
   
Love DiS? Become a Patron of the site here »

View Nested Linear
  • Re: user ages:

    what about users with no age? i'd imagine that's where most of your 24+ people are. not speaking for myself, of course...
    random | 25 Mar '05, 09:11 | X
    • Re: user ages:

      how did you find it out
      elliotcallard @random | 25 Mar '05, 10:16 | X
  • Re: user ages:

    I'm so common.

    Why did you specifically look at names beginning with "-", out of interest?
    OceanStorm | 25 Mar '05, 10:54 | X
  • Re: user ages:

    i am the saddest of all sad people ever. thought i'd make that clear from the outset.

    i used your data to plot a histogram. it shows a non-normal distribution of ages, supporting my theory that most people over 24 don't give their ages, and that the real median age may be higher than suggested using only those ages that are reported.

    if anyone cares to discuss further statistical tests that might be carried out on the data then please go and do something more worthwhile with your day, like i'm going to do now that i've realised what a pathetic square i am becoming.
    random | 25 Mar '05, 12:10 | X
    • Re: user ages:

      You know when trolls come on here calling us geeks? This is why :)
      Thom_fa @random | 25 Mar '05, 12:30 | X
      • Re: user ages:

        don't worry i've got over myself now - am going out now to do something ROCK AND FUCKING ROLL
        random @Thom_fa | 25 Mar '05, 12:31 | X
      • Re: user ages:

        Rock 'n' troll
        John_Brainlove @zakkrastaII | 25 Mar '05, 14:05 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          'I'm sure he didn't just mean the geeks, but all people with slightly unusual hobbies or interests'
          SouthCoastKevin @zakkrastaII | 27 Mar '05, 15:01 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          for this to mean anything you need to state how many users in total
          then it is interesting
          otherwise yo jus saying there's a thousand 16 year olds here
          percentages tell the real tales innit
          -Raz- | 25 Mar '05, 13:47 | X
          • Re: user ages:

            see!?!? YOU are not sad. I am.
            -Raz- @-Raz- | 25 Mar '05, 13:47 | X
            • Re: user ages:

              It's not sad to be interested in the demographics of the DiS readership is it? Or does saying that make me double-sad... I just don't know any more. WHAT'S COOL? WHAT DOES IT MATTER!!! I'VE LOST TRACK! ARGHHH
              *sets self on fire and jumps out of the window*
              John_Brainlove @-Raz- | 25 Mar '05, 14:07 | X
            • Re: user ages:

              yeah, i was going to mention confidence intervals but then i thought better of it.
              random @-Raz- | 25 Mar '05, 14:09 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                What's a 'confidence interval'?
                John_Brainlove @random | 25 Mar '05, 22:16 | X
                • Re: user ages:

                  don't think about it. you don't need to know.
                  random @John_Brainlove | 26 Mar '05, 11:58 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          mysql> select age, repeat('*',count(id)/100) as histo from user where age > 11 and age < 35 group by age order by age;
          +------+-------------+
          | age | histo |
          +------+-------------+
          | 12 | |
          | 13 | ** |
          | 14 | **** |
          | 15 | ******* |
          | 16 | ********** |
          | 17 | ********** |
          | 18 | *********** |
          | 19 | ******** |
          | 20 | ******* |
          | 21 | ******* |
          | 22 | ****** |
          | 23 | ****** |
          | 24 | ****** |
          | 25 | ***** |
          | 26 | **** |
          | 27 | *** |
          | 28 | ** |
          | 29 | * |
          | 30 | ** |
          | 31 | * |
          | 32 | * |
          | 33 | |
          | 34 | |
          +------+-------------+

          There's a lot that won't admit their age too.
          matt | 25 Mar '05, 15:59 | X
          • Re: user ages:

            negatively skewed huh? :P
            OceanStorm @matt | 25 Mar '05, 16:04 | X
            • Re: user ages:

              Yeah looks like it.

              The statistician in me is inclined to apply some kind of smooth transformation to the age variable to reflect 'stage of musical development' rather than chronological age, leading to something that'd probably look a lot more normal and pass various goodness of fit tests for Normal-ness.

              Of course that's just subjective handwaving but most statistics is, unless you have a really convincing mathematical model for the distribution of observations you're making, which most of the time you don't. Not my favourite bit of maths by a long way.
              matt @OceanStorm | 25 Mar '05, 16:15 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                Wow...your favourite bit being?
                ladyoftheflowers @matt | 25 Mar '05, 16:55 | X
                • Re: user ages:

                  Oh set theory, mathematical logic, topology.
                  matt @ladyoftheflowers | 25 Mar '05, 18:39 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                wow obviously i'm not that sad then! cheers!
                random @matt | 25 Mar '05, 17:14 | X
                • Re: user ages:

                  Yeah just thought I'd step in and out-sad everyone.
                  That said, I spent less time on it than the original guy did (mainly cos I have direct access to the database but yeah).

                  Statistics is one of the most dull, inelegant, messy and utilitarian areas of maths, so yeah it is a bit sad unless you have interesting uses for it (like, say, our recommendations system that's all based on statistics). Maths in general is not 'sad' though.
                  matt @random | 25 Mar '05, 18:42 | X
                  • Re: user ages:

                    statistics was the only module that i actually passed for a-level further maths.
                    cant remember a fucking bit of it now.
                    i enjoy(ed) it though.
                    alcxxk @matt | 25 Mar '05, 19:54 | X
                    • Re: user ages:

                      Oh yeah... a-level stats was a bit of a doss, it can get really really tedious at university though.

                      Some kids at another school had to do an 'experiment' or something for coursework for their stats A-level, so they studied the deterioration in their dart-throwing accuracy with increasing alcohol intake. :) So just a big excuse for going to old man pubs and playing darts, they wrote it up properly and all.
                      matt @alcxxk | 25 Mar '05, 20:09 | X
                      • Re: user ages:

                        while on the topic, do you know the calculation for users with most/least similar tastes to you? is it a rank correlation? in which case does the number equate to p or something?
                        random @matt | 26 Mar '05, 11:43 | X
                        • Re: user ages:

                          Nope, we use vector methods :) the figure is actually the cosine of the angle between two ratings vectors in some high-dimensional artist-preference space.
                          matt @random | 26 Mar '05, 14:35 | X
                          • Re: user ages:

                            OH GOD
                            i may have to cut and paste that into my user profile.
                            that is so cool.
                            alcxxk @matt | 26 Mar '05, 21:48 | X
                            • Re: user ages:

                              *Hopes alcxxk hasn't wet himself in excitement*
                              ;-)
                              tom_from_sparks @alcxxk | 26 Mar '05, 21:50 | X
                              • Re: user ages:

                                *checks pants*
                                *feels sorry to disappoint tom*
                                alcxxk @tom_from_sparks | 26 Mar '05, 22:03 | X
                                • Re: user ages:

                                  New Huggies pull-ups doing a good job eh?

                                  ;-) :-) :-D
                                  tom_from_sparks @alcxxk | 26 Mar '05, 22:05 | X
                            • Re: user ages:

                              Haha. Go on then!
                              matt @alcxxk | 27 Mar '05, 03:14 | X
                          • Re: user ages:

                            so what's significant? i don't really know much statistics, just use it in my job to show where there are significant correlations etc., hence i'm a bit anal about conf intervals and significance.
                            random @matt | 27 Mar '05, 21:14 | X
                            • Re: user ages:

                              Oh I've not really gone into depth on how that figure is distributed - it's essentially just plucked out of the air, but in quite an elegant fashion :)

                              I think if you make a highly dubious simplifying assumption that people's paired ratings follow bivariate normal distribution, you could use this to find a confidence interval: eek but frankly the sight of that page makes me sick. Coming up with a really convincing statistical model for the relationships between pairs of artist ratings would be pretty hard I'd imagine. Clustering and factor-based analysis are better approaches but also a lot more complex - I went for something simple and elegant :)

                              I found statistics bored the pants off me at uni, and covered it from a very mathematical point of view so you probably know more than me about the practise of it.
                              matt @random | 28 Mar '05, 01:33 | X
                              • Re: user ages:

                                Mathworld is God, i love that website.
                                polko @matt | 28 Mar '05, 23:47 | X
                                • Re: user ages:

                                  Mathworld isn't really much use for learning maths, it's a good reference for stuff you already know though. Lots of pretty formulae but not much background.
                                  matt @polko | 29 Mar '05, 02:03 | X
          • Re: user ages:

            You're such a legend Matt. It's so cool that you actually just did that :D
            Smileadelic @matt | 25 Mar '05, 23:35 | X
            • Re: user ages:

              Ha. Can't tell if thats sarcasm or not but cheers. I'm working on the database at the mo so thought I'd run a proper query
              matt @Smileadelic | 26 Mar '05, 02:18 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                No no, I'm being totally genuine - I just thought that was cool!
                Smileadelic @matt | 26 Mar '05, 09:23 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          i'm 16. and not emo. fucking yas for me.
          the_patient @french_kissing | 27 Mar '05, 03:15 | X
          • Re: user ages:

            i am also 16. and also not emo. yeahs! *high five*
            pretty_vacant @the_patient | 27 Mar '05, 04:31 | X
            • Re: user ages:

              and you're from scotland and like Kula Shaker. rock n roll. are you sure you're not me in another guise?
              pretty_vacant @pretty_vacant | 27 Mar '05, 04:35 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                I'm 16.. I'm well emo.
                Mystery_White_Boy @pretty_vacant | 27 Mar '05, 13:56 | X
              • Re: user ages:

                rock and/or roll.

                i would do the rock-on sign if it didn't look so undeniably shite in ascii form.
                the_patient @pretty_vacant | 27 Mar '05, 19:55 | X
                • Re: user ages:

                  the shiteness just adds to the coolness in my opinion, makes you proper metal then, dunnit.
                  Mystery_White_Boy @the_patient | 27 Mar '05, 20:35 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          well why didn't you just change it then?
          james_delve @abcbetney | 28 Mar '05, 02:10 | X
        • Re: user ages:

          matt is letting others in on his band rating/similarity calculations, it and he are well cool.

          But to get back to me....
          I, being self-absorbed am, only concerned with how many 44 yr olds or older are on the website....i.e. is I the grandaddy? (I believe Grim Jim may be a rival).

          You have missed my demographic from your figures.
          (seems to be the story of my life)
          creakyknees @jonse | 29 Mar '05, 13:27 | X
          • Re: user ages:

            go to
            USERS
            then go to SEARCH USER PROFILES
            then type 44 into AGE, and see how many results come up.
            and there are 21 who lisrt themselves as 44.
            alcxxk @creakyknees | 29 Mar '05, 17:41 | X
Share on
   
Love DiS? Become a Patron of the site here »
View Nested Linear
« Back to Social

Report this thread
Drowned in Sound
  • DROWNED IN SOUND
  • HOME
  • SITE MAP
  • NEWS
  • IN DEPTH
  • IN PHOTOS
  • RECORDS
  • RECOMMENDED RECORDS
  • ALBUMS OF THE YEAR
  • FESTIVAL COVERAGE
  • COMMUNITY
  • MUSIC FORUM
  • SOCIAL BOARD
  • REPORT ERRORS
  • CONTACT US
  • JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • FOLLOW DiS
  • GOOGLE+
  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • SHUFFLER
  • TUMBLR
  • YOUTUBE
  • RSS FEED
  • RSS EMAIL SUBSCRIBE
  • MISC
  • TERM OF USE
  • PRIVACY
  • ADVERTISING
  • OUR WIKIPEDIA
© 2000-2018 DROWNED IN SOUND