Earlier quoted context omitted.
the natural state is not the civilized one.
Humans are the universe, everything humans do is natural.
Very self centered way of looking at the world.
The dating app paradox
141–150 of 570 posts
Re: The dating app paradox
#142It's only a paradox until you realize that dating apps would shoot themselves in the foot with such a user-hostile model, trashing their brand. Hanlon's Razor directs us to the simpler explanation, which is that 90% of people on dating markets stay on dating markets; for which there are many, many highly personalized reasons. No dating app can fix its users' mindsets. There are three rules on dating apps, and they ha…
> It's only a paradox until you realize that dating apps would shoot themselves in the foot with such a user-hostile model, trashing their brand.
This is sarcasm right? What dating app has a stellar reputation? Which one hasn't been outright caught or isn't widely suspected of using fake profiles to string users along? Or hasn't failed to prevent obvious scammers/rapists? Or hasn't leaked/sold their customer's data?
The idea that dating apps have a precious reputation that they must carefully maintain or no one would use their services is beyond ridiculous
Re: The dating app paradox
#143The fact that one company repeatedly bought out its competition and now owns, according the the article, 45 dating apps probably has a lot to do with why they suck. Instead of competing by trying to be better, just buy out the rivals, gut them, and make everything worse. As long as the dominant player has lots of capital to buy any upstarts and the regulatory environment lets them do it, it can be an easier way to ma…
They ought to get some kind of restraining order against Match that prevents them from acquiring any more companies.
There are antitrust laws. They just need to enforce them properly.
Re: The dating app paradox
#144A doctor friend refers to them as the chlamydia apps. But still uses them frequently.
Re: The dating app paradox
#145The fact that one company repeatedly bought out its competition and now owns, according the the article, 45 dating apps probably has a lot to do with why they suck. Instead of competing by trying to be better, just buy out the rivals, gut them, and make everything worse. As long as the dominant player has lots of capital to buy any upstarts and the regulatory environment lets them do it, it can be an easier way to ma…
As well as regulating them, Western governments might want to actually fund high-quality, not-for-profit dating systems of some kind. Improved health for citizens, lessened extremism, not to mention possibly boosted population growth could result.
The Tokyo city government launched its own dating app recently.
News article: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/people/article/3248989/will-j...
Previous HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39060790
Re: The dating app paradox
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
the natural state is not the civilized one.
Humans are the universe, everything humans do is natural.
Only if you assume a useless definition of natural. By your definition, everything would be natural, right? Can you give an example for something thats not natural?
Re: The dating app paradox
#147An actually good date is worth potentially hundreds of dollars. I’m surprised there isn’t an app which meets this need. Yes there is “The League” but even that is just a more exclusive Tinder. No, make a matchmaker app for high paying customers that uses human curation. $500 for 3 dates.
This kind of thing has actually existed for a long time. They predated dating sites and had even worked off paper as far as I understand. The problem is they cost a lot more, and still had basically zero guarantee of any success. IIRC they were so expensive most single people would have trouble affording them. I met my wife on eHarmony back when it was relatively new. I had tried one of the non-computerized matching…
Speed dating has actually made a bit of a comeback:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/speed-dating-online-apps-single...
I highly recommend it to anyone looking and tired of apps.
Even if you don’t like the speed dating format, you end up in a bar filled with people you know are single and looking.
Re: The dating app paradox
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Reproductive baseline value of females is obvious." This has some serious sexism/incel vibes. Visual appearance can be very deceptive. There are plenty of very 'conventionally' attractive people who have less obvious health disorders ranging from infertility to women with high likelyhood of death during birth to mental disorders that would cause problems for raising a child.
Reproduction is sexist. Women bear, and contribute, the lions share of the fetal cost. Not all healthy appearing prime age females can reproduce, obviously. Healthy, young adult, well nourished appearance is still a good indicator towards 9 months of reproductive value.
I can no longer reply to your justifiably flagged and dead ggp.
What you wrote there
> A healthy presumably fertile body, kempt and sane enough looking that the fetus will survive nine months.
also applies to men. Your comments suggest you’re too biased to realize as much.
Re: The dating app paradox
#149It's only a paradox until you realize that dating apps would shoot themselves in the foot with such a user-hostile model, trashing their brand. Hanlon's Razor directs us to the simpler explanation, which is that 90% of people on dating markets stay on dating markets; for which there are many, many highly personalized reasons. No dating app can fix its users' mindsets. There are three rules on dating apps, and they ha…
I don't doubt that many users are approaching dating apps suboptimally but I don't think its fair to completely throw out the idea that these companies are knowingly trading quality of service for profitability.
Network effects are such a huge piece of the puzzle that can draw people to a service despite it being a bad experience (see FB marketplace), and app companies have gotten extremely good at finding the optimal amount of user hostility (see the vast majority of mobile games).
Beyond that, Match can afford to be user hostile because they have proven able to consistently buy basically everyone in town. Who cares if Tinder gets a bad rap, there's a very good chance users go to another Match Group service and they can buy practically any non-Match service that springs up.
Re: The dating app paradox
#150Until dating apps explicitly measure success in terms of matches made and users deleting the app at all levels of their business, the quality of their products will suffer If a product team is incentivized to bring in revenue over creating long term relationships, then it will always make decisions that sacrifice the latter for the former Investors need to understand and accept that these business measure success in…
I've kind of wondered how you would structure something to have incentives line up.
Sign a contract saying you pay nothing for as long as you are actively swiping/matching/communicating, but if you stop for 1-2 months you have to pay? Rather feels bad... but maybe the 'lucky' users would be more willing to pay since they found someone? As it currently is & the article describes, current dating app revenue feels super scummy from top to bottom.
Maybe even a discount/refund if you come back to the app after a month or two off :D