Live data from Hacker News

The dating app paradox

npr.org

331–340 of 570 posts

Re: The dating app paradox

#331
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've thought for a while now that it is a matter of national interest that your population couples up and has children. It's immensely important for the success of a nation and it's odd that the majority of how people meet now is through data apps and that there is no oversight over these at all. They have every incentive to match you with someone you are more likely to have a short term relationship than match you w…

>I've thought for a while now that it is a matter of national interest that your population couples up and has children Yeah, and many people in the US would be way more eager to do that had we had: - affordable housing - minimum wage that allows a single parent to support themselves - universal healthcare - mandated paid (and then, unpaid) parental leave - free childcare - substancial financial assistance to new par…

>- free childcare

Where exactly are all the workers going to come from to support this one? There's already a labor shortage, and presumably you want to make sure child-care workers are highly vetted. On top of this, with an aging population, there's a greater need for care workers for seniors, and here there's a lot of problems with these workers abusing the seniors.

>- walkable safe environments, transportation, and regulations that allow children to move around on their own

This would be great, but most Americans don't want this. They sure as hell aren't voting for it, and achieving it would require basically bulldozing most American cities. Americans have built themselves, ever since the end of WWII, a country and infrastructure that's entirely incompatible with the lifestyle you advocate here. I live in Tokyo now, and it's exactly what you're advocating here, but I simply can't imagine America somehow becoming like this in my lifetime. (It's one of the main reasons I came here.)

Anyway, as other posters have noted, other countries have much of what you want here, and their fertility rates are quite poor, worse than the US in fact.

If you really want to get people to have more children, you need to force society back to the "good old days", where women have far fewer rights, divorce is highly stigmatized, being non-religious or non-Christian is highly stigmatized, contraception is generally non-available, women basically can't have jobs except for schoolteachers (and only until they're married) or maids and need to just find a husband and become a SAHM, etc. Just look at the societies with high fertility, but contemporary and historically: they're absolutely horrible for women's rights. High fertility and large families have always been accomplished on the backs of oppressed women (and I'm not sure it was all that great for most men either).

Re: The dating app paradox

#332
post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a few European countries. But! Turns out it doesn't work. At all.

There should be an auction system for women to accept bids from the government to have kids. Might not get the type of parents society wants though. Or remove old age benefits, and make it so you might only get them directly from your kids if the kids are willing to support you. That would put long term consequences more into view and link costs and benefits.

>only get them directly from your kids if the kids are willing to support you

Society would rather take their chances with Gen Y and Millenials than open that pandoras box.

Re: The dating app paradox

#333
post #96

I'd like to bring back an article, more analytical on this paratox (the title, Why You Should Never Pay For Online Dating, speaks a lot), from the old and now dead OkCupid blog. Funnily, this post was deleted just after the acquisition from the Match Group in 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20100821041938/http://blog.okcup... Latest discussion on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33163930

OkCupid really went to pot after the acquisition. You can't even browse/search any more. It's all Tinder-style matching. Is that what people really want? Online dating has gotten progressively worse over the past ~10 years. Even Craigslist personals is gone... Where can one meet a weirdo nowadays?

KiwiFarms, or you could try 4chan, I recommend /b, but I am sure other spots will net you plenty of weirdos.

Re: The dating app paradox

#334
post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a good analysis on what are the strongest predictors a good long term relationship? I've broke up with my ex a few months ago. She was an MD. Now a lot of my matches on Tinder are medical workers (over 30%) and I'm baffled why. tin_foil_hat_mode: He spoke with X last, recommend similar matches, he will come back, we will have recurring revenue.

The likeliest explanation is something on your profile makes MDs interested. For example a professional photo or something in your bio. Dating profiles have a limited set of info. Tiny tweaks can generate massive filter effects.

I have very little info. I like snowboards, standup, dogs, no description. I've put software engineer as a job. A couple years ago, I've A/B tested a few photos and with regular photo in a t-shirt I've only got a 2-4 likes per week. With a very similar photo to this one https://e0.pxfuel.com/wallpapers/29/831/desktop-wallpaper-io...

I've got about 60 likes per week. I've thought that's a lot, but my ex told me she's got almost 2000 in a first week.

Re: The dating app paradox

#335

Former dating app founder here - lots of thoughts on the space - feel free to AMA High level though, there's a lot of human behavior which makes dating frustrating with or without apps. At it's core, even in the best case, dating has A LOT of rejection. Dating apps introduce more opportunity for incremental validation (you got liked!) but also incremental rejection (you got ghosted!) and the sheer number of interacti…

I recently wondered if AI could reasonably help with the awkwardness of such interactions. Could AIs do the awkward "is this a match" chatting anonymously and asynchronously? At least enough to conclude that a) If matched, these two people will likely reach their first date?

Re: The dating app paradox

#336

Former dating app founder here - lots of thoughts on the space - feel free to AMA High level though, there's a lot of human behavior which makes dating frustrating with or without apps. At it's core, even in the best case, dating has A LOT of rejection. Dating apps introduce more opportunity for incremental validation (you got liked!) but also incremental rejection (you got ghosted!) and the sheer number of interacti…

> Apps are more transparent and equitable with how they expose profiles to other users. Don't bias toward highly liked people to increase perceived "quality" and shadow-hide show profiles that aren't liked often (and then ask them to pay lol). Show people more randomly, to better represent the true cross section of people on the app.

This won't work; if you do this, you'll expose that the average online dating user is... well, average.

There's a bit of kayfabe going on; users want to think the other users of online dating are 8+/10, sexy, flirty, fun, and desirable singles. Unfortunately, 69% of Americans are overweight and 36% are obese. If profiles users see weren't heavily weighted toward highly-rated ones, the perception of online dating would immediately change from "online dating is fine, a bunch of attractive people are using this" to "online dating is only for the ugly and desperate"; the article points out that this is the way Gen Z perceives online dating already.

Dating apps really struggle to keep the most desirable, because those are the ones least likely to need it. Yet they're also the most important for a dating app to have. As fewer desirable people use it, the less perceived legitimacy it has, which results in fewer people using it, particularly the desirable ones. I suspect dating apps are experiencing this death spiral now.

Re: The dating app paradox

#338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never used a government web site that was better than a marginal ad driven site. I can barely pay my trash bill and can’t imagine a dating app run by any aspect of US federal, state, or local government.

Try websites run by other governments.

Sadly, that’s not really helpful as only US dating sites are relevant for me.

Re: The dating app paradox

#339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never used a government web site that was better than a marginal ad driven site. I can barely pay my trash bill and can’t imagine a dating app run by any aspect of US federal, state, or local government.

Enjoy: https://www.canada.ca/en.html / https://design.canada.ca/ https://www.government.nl/ https://www.nasa.gov/ https://vancouver.ca/ https://richmond.ca https://www.gov.uk/

I like the nasa site, but it’s not really transactionally useful.

Re: The dating app paradox

#340
post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The likeliest explanation is something on your profile makes MDs interested. For example a professional photo or something in your bio. Dating profiles have a limited set of info. Tiny tweaks can generate massive filter effects.

I have very little info. I like snowboards, standup, dogs, no description. I've put software engineer as a job. A couple years ago, I've A/B tested a few photos and with regular photo in a t-shirt I've only got a 2-4 likes per week. With a very similar photo to this one https://e0.pxfuel.com/wallpapers/29/831/desktop-wallpaper-io... I've got about 60 likes per week. I've thought that's a lot, but my ex told me she's…

If your "best foot forward" is a snapshot in a T-shirt, that is understandably going to draw less interest than a professional model shot by a professional photographer with professional hair, makeup, lighting, and expensive clothes.

I've got clothes that probably aren't much cheaper than that, and while I do look my best in them in random photos, it's nothing compared to the response I get when I'm seen wearing them in person. I'm not a model (I don't have the looks), but a man in a good suit is going to provide enough pause to make most women at least consider him. Then it's up to you to be charming.

Post reply on HN