Live data from Hacker News

Never pay for online dating (2010)

web.archive.org

101–110 of 495 posts

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#101

Related personal anecdote: I am experimenting with Tinder subscription at the moment, and it feels incredibly exploitative. When you make a profile, matches are frequent and you can tell that you show up for people. However it gradually falls down with time, and the only predictable and obvious way to get back up is to pay for Boosts and/or Priority Likes. Right now my 6-month old profile gets ZERO likes outside of t…

No post body was provided.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#102
They also had an amazing blog post about how dating profiles came down to ~85% how attractive you are (both men and women).

Most people look at 3-4 images and pass, this probably was the inspiration for Tinder.

One example of this was personality score, which they ended up removing. "In short, according to our users, “looks” and “personality” were the same thing". In this example it was just a profile picture with no text...

Whole bunch of interesting knowledge from this:

https://archive.ph/QNCbf#selection-513.0-513.79

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#103

I don't get it. Why does no government anywhere run a non-profit dating site from tax-payer money when this is becoming the most popular way people are meeting? All the options people have are using toxic apps which entire business model is to undermine the self-esteem of young men and scamming them out of their money. And then people wonder where the mental health problems and mass shootings come from. I really don'…

Seems like a waste of tax-payer money to me. Why can't people just... meet others offline like they did 10+ years ago.

Well, if the government wants to help people meeting offline, it's gonna cost a helluva lot more than a website... to the point it doesn't sound like a waste anymore. I don't see society going back to offline dating by itself.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#104
Nice article but not sure I follow the argument here. The problem of messaging into the void can be solved by changing the settings to only show you paid members. If they don't give the option then don't use them. Paying members are more serious so it makes sense to not spend your time on non-paying members. BTW, at least on Tinder I know that everyone can message back regardless if they are paid members. Maybe in 2010 things were different and the article made more sense then.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

can you explain more?

Their motto is that their app is "meant to be deleted." They don't want to you stay on it, but they DO want you to tell all your single friends about it. Hinge's free tier is absolutely excellent and I have gotten multiple dates, as well as a girlfriend, without paying a cent. What's the catch, you may ask? As with most dating apps, let's just say that if you don't have a "highly competitive" profile, you will strugg…

> Their motto is that their app is "meant to be deleted."

I have seen this on NYC subway adverts, but is there anything substantially different about their app or business model that backs up their motto?

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#107
post #12

OkCupid was bought by Match Group (who run almost all online dating sites, including Match, eHarmony, and Tinder) in 2011 and took down this post not long after. EDIT: the purchase was Feb 2011 [1] and the post was removed sometime between Jan 2011 [2] and Mar 2011 [3]. The rest of the blog was still up at the time [4]. [1] https://www.npr.org/2011/02/03/133456140/The-Last-Word-In-Bu... [2] https://web.archive.org/we…

More Orwellian still, they edited articles that contained data inconvenient to the politically correct narrative and elite ideology. Edit: Here's an example. “I’m bisexual.” REALITY: 80% of self-identified bisexuals are only interested in one gender. People who describe themselves as bisexual overwhelmingly message either one sex or the other, not both as you might expect. https://web.archive.org/web/20170307114207/h…

I don't see how the bisexual statistic is politically incorrect.

It makes sense, considering the self-professed "bisexuals" I've known, which are well known as well in liberal-leaning circles:

1. Young women who pretend to be Bi to get more attention from Men

2. People who pretend to be Bi to avoid having to completely come out of the closet

There's actually a saying in the gay community for the latter, "Bi now, gay later!"

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#108
post #34

This may have been true 12 years ago, but years later OkCupid added "last active", which was a search criteria to weed out old profiles. At least, was there in 2015 when I met my current partner. The gist of the article seems to be combining two different things: why you should pay for online dating, and false advertising. I don't think the OP joins those arguments very well. Plus, again, this was 12 years ago. I thi…

OKC was bought by Match - they were no longer the same company after being acquired as they were before. All these articles were written before they were acquired.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#109
post #9

You, as a user of a dating app, are forever in a Nash Equilibrium with the dating app. When you find the love of your life, you delete the app forever. Therefore, everything the app does to help you find that person works directly against their own goals (user growth, “engagement”. subscriptions).

I wonder if there is an alternative business model which would put users and the business on the same side. Could you put a lien against someone's marriage, such that in order to marry someone you meet on HappyDating.com you had to pay the outstanding debt? Anything less extreme?

For short-term incentives, you could have some kind of scheme where you monetize dates. Eg when you match someone the app proposes you a list of partner bars, restaurants, parks, etc.

In theory, this could create a perverse incentive for the app to set you up for matches that last just long enough for a few dates, but not long enough that you get off the app. In practice, I don't think matching algorithms are precise enough that the app could act on that incentive.

The bigger problem is that most users would completely ignore the monetized dates.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#110

I don't get it. Why does no government anywhere run a non-profit dating site from tax-payer money when this is becoming the most popular way people are meeting? All the options people have are using toxic apps which entire business model is to undermine the self-esteem of young men and scamming them out of their money. And then people wonder where the mental health problems and mass shootings come from. I really don'…

At some level, a dating network needs to make recommendations.

In Plato's Republic, he proposed his vision for a utopian city-state. Essentially, citizens would be ranked into castes: bronze/iron for laborers and artisans, silver for soldiers, gold for leaders. When people came of age in this utopia, they would be paired off through what they would be told is a random lottery.

In reality, however, the city's leaders would decide on the couplings ahead of time, pairing like with like. Plato called this the "noble lie", and it neatly demonstrates what any government-run dating system would probably develop into: a systemic eugenics program.

Post reply on HN