Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't you have a pipeline with girls you're going to cold-call, and a dating life manager that breathes down your neck when you haven't taken at least 10 girls out this month?
A dating life manager is a contradiction in itself. In order to be an expert at dating, it's reasonable to assume that you've been on many dates. That pretty much means you actually suck at dating as the very point of dating is to stop dating (for most).
Salesforce, but for Dating
231–240 of 243 posts
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#232I'm really surprised at how poorly received this is! I did something much simpler for tracking dates, a google calendar with a short biopic and some snips from conversation. At my peak, I had 18 dates in 21 days. For me, it was a way to keep names straight. After date seven in a row, you may struggle. I formalized dating a bit, since I was a long termer before and was new to online dating. (Didn't exist in previous r…
I’m paying $250+/session for a dating coach just for online dating because the bar is so high - even though I’ve done all the usual advice from dating advice places. At this point, I have to spend another $5k on a pro photographer following me around for a few days and taking photos/videos of me at various events/hobbies with friends/animals/etc because that’s the level it is for men who aren’t naturally photogenic/good looking. Same for having the coach actually write out the profile, write comments, etc. I can’t even do it because it requires someone who does this as their full time job in order for an average looking guy to be remotely successful. I wish just liking a person with an average profile that isn’t holding any dead fish was enough but it isn’t. Women want more.
Not even joking. It’s bad for most men - you’re part of an exceptional few because you’re naturally good looking and won’t have to put in anywhere near the effort the rest of us do.
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#233Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
> should automatically scan my emails, texts and chats Great, easy to integrate one service with the APIs of a bunch of others! > Also, want it to be 100% local and privacy first. ...but in combination? Never going to happen. Ask yourself: who's signing up for the API keys to enable the client-side service to talk to all these services? Is it the end-user, or is it this software's developer? If it's the software's de…
Can’t it just scan the client? For email at least, I feel it can just read your inbox or whatever and store the results of the analysis locally. You were very active with this friend for n years and it dropped off. Drop them a line.
Also, that presumes you're on desktop. On mobile, you just can't poke into another app's sandbox/container that way (unless the target app hasn't explicitly granted made some part of its container-filesystem externally accessible; and there's no reason these apps would.) And many people only have a mobile device.
If you're okay with a partial solution, a far easier one would be scraping the data out of the few clients that have web-app versions through browser extensions that read the state out of the page they're running in.
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am sure it is not a parody. I have witnessed co-workers getting professional photographs and using spreadsheets to track dates/matches, all to carefully optimize their dating app success. It reminds me of the early 2000s "pick up artist" stuff, I had a few friends who read the books and would actively hit on women anytime we went out. It was horrible haha. As for the maker of this app, if it fills a need and gets w…
>It reminds me of the early 2000s "pick up artist" stuff, I had a few friends who read the books and would actively hit on women anytime we went out. It was horrible haha. In the early 2000s only "professionals" used CAD. Now (almost) everyone with a 3d printer or a shed they want to build uses CAD. It's trickled down. The pickup artists are on the bleeding edge of the "craft" if you can call it that. It shouldn't be…
I had a friend who used the "craft" and had enough success with it that he was utterly convinced he could get literally any woman to sleep with him. He failed to notice that all of his "marks" could be grouped into roughly two sets of women:
- Those who were unaware of the game being played. They were highly insecure and not intelligent or not socially aware enough to realize they were being manipulated.
- Those who were aware of the game, and were playing it themselves. They were consciously looking to get laid, and they would sit in judgement of their suitors, sleeping with whoever could navigate their "shit tests" and put on an impressive enough performance. An odd sort of "game recognizes game" fencing match.
Personally I thought these performances were an embarrassing dog-and-pony show, but there's no accounting for taste.Anyway, my point is that some of this stuff really does "work", but it's not nearly as universal as its practitioners like to believe, and the men who practice it are often being gamed themselves. Anyone who is aware of the game (even subconsciously) and not interested in playing it is immune.
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#236Isn't this just a spreadsheet? You could probably build and deploy the entire thing in a day in Notion
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think "Umm..." would be zero bits, and half a bit would be more like "Probably"/"Probably not"
"Probably" is more than one bit, not less, no? It conveys both uncertainty and an opinion on the answer. "Is this tree deciduous?" "Yes" - one bit "Is this tree evergreen?" "Probably" - one bit (they don't know), another bit (their guess) But I'm way off any formal understanding of this, and it can be rigorously defined. Meta comment: "half a bit" was clearly a joke, and so was my response; now I'm taking your reply…
"Umm..." definitely carries some kind of information, but it doesn't actually help answer the question.
Based on the information theoretic definition of entropy we'd need to go from 50:50 to 89% certainty to get half a bit of information, and I'd probably qualify 89% certainty as "probably"
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try dating websites. The apps seem like cancer.
Are there any still? Seems like the apps have killed them off
On top of all that, they're all slowly changing to the swipe mechanics of Tinder and the like. Personally I hate that model, but apparently it's "won".
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#239[flagged]
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
Re: Salesforce, but for Dating
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can’t it just scan the client? For email at least, I feel it can just read your inbox or whatever and store the results of the analysis locally. You were very active with this friend for n years and it dropped off. Drop them a line.
That presumes the client stores anything locally + in plaintext. Clients like Facebook Messenger, Slack, and Discord have no local storage other than (opaque, fragmentary, useless) cache databases, because they're just "webapps in a can"; while many of the more modern native chat clients like WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, etc keep all their synced state encrypted-at-rest on disk. Also, that presumes you're on desktop.…