Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

wfmynews2.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 416 posts

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#341

Post by JimboOmega »

lnanek2 wrote: post #239
JimboOmega wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only OkCupid does; Tinder barely tries and even then it's hidden. For the most part the selling point is that you get introduced to people you wouldn't just meet in your normal social cirlces/events. Apps besides OkCupid have mostly moved to the model where you put in a few basic facts (age/sex, do you drink, etc), upload some pictures, a short ( Also on the data collection front, the business model is more based aro…

Actually, they do try to match you on attractiveness. Also how much you swipe. If you swipe to like every profile you get different results.

This is what I meant by "barely". It still makes no effort to actually look for compatibility.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#342

Post by dylan604 »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #203
akersten wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook dating was announced recently. It doesn't really change my argument even if there weren't any major competitors; it's a prime space for entrepreneurs if it is as broken as people claim - there is a pretty low barrier to entry.

why investors don't fund dating https://andrewchen.co/why-investors-dont-fund-dating/

Maybe the "getting big enough to have Match buy us" could be the entire business plan for the next app to "compete" in this market? If you can bootstrap yourself along for getting Match's attention, you might not need the investors.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#343

Post by jfengel »

Someone1234 wrote: post #32
brenden2 wrote: post #8

I've thought about making a new dating app. The existing apps suck for 2 reasons: in most markets men are at a significant disadvantage because of how men and women differ in the way they approach dating (and there's also a significantly unfair male:female ratio in many markets). Additionally, none of them are really designed to get people off the app, but rather they're built to increase engagement and keep people o…

> One idea I've had is to disallow conversation in the app, and instead focus on making date plans if there's a match. You should likely run this idea past a few women. The typical reason they want to converse before meeting is security: Meeting strangers is dangerous and they want to "sniff test" to see if it is safe enough to even go that far. Your app idea largely seems to exist to solve issues men have with datin…

Conversely, I've found that a lot of women have pushed me to meet early. They tell me that a lot of men just want to talk, and they're not interested in pen pals.

That never worked out well for me: I'm a person of words, and while I really do want to meet, I'm unlikely to click with somebody who doesn't love conversation enough to chat before that. So I stopped meeting women who weren't interesting online; it seemed that the hope that they might be interesting in person never panned out. I hope they met somebody more to their taste.

Meeting strangers is dangerous, but if you arrange it in a public place, that's reasonably safe. And probably at least as good as trying to feel out whether they're dangerous via chat.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#344

Post by an_opabinia »

crazygringo wrote: post #273
chroem- wrote: post #36

Dating apps are extremely broken, and yet they're almost all owned by a single company: Match Group. I have a suspicion that these apps are left intentionally broken to keep users fruitlessly searching and boost engagement metrics. I can't find a complete list of the companies they've acquired, but last time I checked, Match owns over 20 different apps and dating sites, including Tinder, OkCupid, and Hinge. We really…

Sorry, but they're not extremely broken. I worked at OkCupid 8 years ago, saw the issues they faced then and have seen the evolution of the apps since then, and right now they really are as good as anyone's been able to come up with that attracts enough active users to generate promising dates. If there were a drastically better solution, then it would take over the market. The last major innovation was when Tinder i…

> I worked at OkCupid 8 years ago...

OkCupid's problem, and the problem at Match Group in general, is that you learned something about 100% of OkCupid users instead of 0.01% of randomly-sampled real world people, and maybe that something that you learned was 200% wrong. And then, you think your answers are 1,000% more correct because 100% - 0.01% = 99.99%.

Granted that logic is great for equity investors. It just isn't necessarily great for users.

Nobody pushed back on the assumption that online dating was a representative sample. Nobody pushes back on whether the right questions were being asked. Match didn't even choose the right engagement metrics, choosing things like message reply rate which can rise while active users fall. The style of how these metrics were chosen and what analysis was done papered over serious issues. And all the people who would have, by now, the maturity and tenure to admit they were wrong are gone.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#345

Post by jfengel »

nlh wrote: post #321

Since we're all discussing our dating app ideas, here's one I've had: Why does your interaction with the app end with the messaging thread? It feels like every app decides that once you've been "connected", that's the end of their responsibility. I'd like to see an app that takes a more holistic approach: A good algorithm gets you connected, allows you to communicate but also helps set up the first (and second? or th…

You'd think there would be money in that, too. Set 'em up at a Starbucks, or a bowling alley, and get kickbacks from the venue. I bet romantic restaurants would pay a pretty penny to get the attention of a man trying to impress a woman -- especially if he told the app that he was willing to spend $200 on a date.

Sounds like a pain in the ass to implement, and you'd get all kinds of accusations of corruption, but they get that anyway.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#346

Post by downerending »

SkyBelow wrote: post #276
crazygringo wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but they're not extremely broken. I worked at OkCupid 8 years ago, saw the issues they faced then and have seen the evolution of the apps since then, and right now they really are as good as anyone's been able to come up with that attracts enough active users to generate promising dates. If there were a drastically better solution, then it would take over the market. The last major innovation was when Tinder i…

>is give you a pool of users far larger than you'd ever encounter in a single night out If the paradox of choice is actually true (as with anything in psychology, it needs further research to be sure), then this could be a major negative instead of a major positive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice

At least for dating, there's an easy solution to the Paradox of Choice problem:

    1.  Be unattractive.
    2.  Don't be attractive.
Seriously, though, this probably was a factor for why I met my current wife on OKC. There were only a few plausible (at best) matches, she was the only one who could converse coherently, and, well, one thing led to another...

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#347

Post by dang »

vectorEQ wrote: post #131
vbtemp wrote: post #34

I had an idea for a dating app a while back, in which the basic idea is that you pay the service to message someone (above a free weekly limit of say 1 msg). The pricing would be reactive - as popular attractive people get more messages, the more it would cost to message them, growing exponentially in order to limit incoming messages to approx a few a day. Unpopular people who got few messages would have a price that…

also put in blockchain, everything needs blockchain :O

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? We're trying for a bit better here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20218608

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#348

Post by Kepler100 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #32
brenden2 wrote: post #8

I've thought about making a new dating app. The existing apps suck for 2 reasons: in most markets men are at a significant disadvantage because of how men and women differ in the way they approach dating (and there's also a significantly unfair male:female ratio in many markets). Additionally, none of them are really designed to get people off the app, but rather they're built to increase engagement and keep people o…

> One idea I've had is to disallow conversation in the app, and instead focus on making date plans if there's a match. You should likely run this idea past a few women. The typical reason they want to converse before meeting is security: Meeting strangers is dangerous and they want to "sniff test" to see if it is safe enough to even go that far. Your app idea largely seems to exist to solve issues men have with datin…

An app has this exact idea, where there is no online conversations. It focuses on helping singles meet in real life directly. Thoughts? https://singlespotapp.com/

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#349

Post by dang »

nicc wrote: post #300
thewarrior wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know about the truth of this but I can attest to a certain version of this from first hand experience. If your profile is not as desirable or just average they start hiding your profile so you don’t get as many matches. Then you pay and start getting slightly more matches. Since you’re average you’ll keep paying for a while till you get matched or maybe not. They keep a few of the desirable people visible wit…

[flagged]

Please don't take HN threads further into ideological flamewar. We're trying to avoid that here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: yikes, it looks like you've repeatedly been posting unsubstantive and/or flamebaity comments. We ban accounts that do that. Can you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN as intended? The idea is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#350

Post by bityard »

umvi wrote: post #82
jressey wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Survivorship Bias: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias I met my wife online after a year of fruitless first dates. Maybe I'm just unappealing or something but it was truly a miserable part of my life. Edit: I'm gonna add in here that most people don't have the stick-to-itiveness that most readers of this site do.

It's not survivorship bias if you failed 100 times before your 1 success. It's only survivorship bias if they hit the jackpot and the very first date worked out perfectly and they lived happily ever after. I was grinding away on tinder/going on dates for months before I found success. But that's not the dating app's fault - I was seeing the same thing using non-app strategies.

I like how "a year" and "months" is mentioned as if either one is a particularly long time. Many people go their entire lives without ever managing to find a compatible partner.
Post reply on HN