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

Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

paulefou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 684 posts

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#391

Post by cnst »

toastal wrote: post #190

This reminds me of my ban from Gumtree. I had issues making a post because I was using uMatrix which blocks (the malicious) reCAPTCHA that they use to block spam posts. With no errors about the missing reCAPTCHA script on the screen and just redirecting me to the submission after what seemed like a sever error, I just tried to resubmit my listing 3 times in a row. I got banned. I emailed them along the lines of "hey,…

So, basically, a reverse discrimination against people who know what's going on?

The same thing happens with corporate VPNs. I guess it only makes sense that Apartment.com doesn't want your business if you're making a bank at one of the larger companies who are big enough to require a VPN service!

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#392

Post by mlyle »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #281
indigochill wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a kind of overfitting. The phone itself isn't a problem, at least as concerns the fear machine. On the other hand, staying linked to Facebook is a problem. I make regular daily use of my phone, but the use is limited to: * Email * Select communication channels (Slack/Signal/etc) * Reading books offline (I download them in advance) * Bus pass * Flashcards * A couple of offline ad-free games I deny push…

Flashcards? That's doesn't seem to have much to do with ending a phone addiction?

Flash cards, in the sense of-- things that show you questions you're trying to memorize/learn the answers to. Not like, cards with flash memory on them.

The person uses their phone for contained things that are not likely to cause a faux-social-reward-cycle.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#393

Post by jaredklewis »

dbingham wrote: post #387
jaredklewis wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who decides which “markets” a company is in and measures their market share in those markets? How is market share measured? Is Tinder a dating service or social media company? If Facebook starts offering a dating feature in app and becomes the biggest player in the dating space, which market is facebook in? Both? If both, does all of facebook's market cap/DAU/whatever metric we settle on to measure market share get f…

A democratically elected government. Look, there is no such thing as a "natural market" that can keep the power of the actors in it in check. The internet was the closest thing to a perfect market that has ever existed and all it has produced is overpowered monopoly after overpowered monopoly. If we want a free society, we don't get that by handing power over to the markets. We get that by building the most responsiv…

Sure, I am not a libertarian or anything like that.

I'm all for good regulation and strong government. However, making good laws and regulations is not easy! The details of these things is incredibly important and can't be solved by some sort of generic market vs government debate.

And while I do think government has a role to play, most of our regulations are poorly designed and have been captured by corporate interests.

I don't see how the proposed rule could be implemented in a way that would have the desired outcome.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#394

Post by whitepaint »

wayoutthere wrote: post #77
polote wrote: post #44

It has always been like that on Tinder. My phone number can't create a new account for example (never receive the confirmation code). That's called shadowban in the case of OP. Bumble started doing the same practices a year ago (which makes sense as they have the same founder) But they are not 100% wrong, Tinder is not here to make people meet each other. They are here to make money and people don't pay because they…

As a woman, Tinder is fine if you wanna find a fuck buddy and don’t take it seriously. I see a lot of people (men and women) get wrapped up in the swipe game and that’s really not how it works. You can’t take anything that happens on that platform personally. Unfortunately, rule #1 on tinder is “be physically attractive”. If you want tinder to work for you consistently as a man, get your personal hygiene in order and…

I would disagree with this. You don't have to be that attractive. Average will do fine. Just make them laugh. I am from Europe and Tinder works pretty good (at least for me) and I am just an ordinary dude.

Also, don't stop just with Tinder. Use Bumble, happn, OkCupid, Badoo. I've got dates from all of these.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#395

Post by vidarh »

lostlogin wrote: post #291
stjohnswarts wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes sense if in the USA since prostitution is illegal in 49 states.

Is the parent saying there is a lot of it on Tinder, and that Tinder isn’t following the law?

Yes, I was saying Tinder is full of straight up prostitution and people seeking sugar daddies who ge offended if you call it out as prostitution. I have nothing against prostitution (and I'm in the UK where it is legal), but I do find it really annoying when dating apps don't do more to keep it off their apps.

Often patterns of fake profiles that were immediately obvious to me as a user took months for them to block.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#396

Post by [deleted] »

rytill wrote: post #382
jaredklewis wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who decides which “markets” a company is in and measures their market share in those markets? How is market share measured? Is Tinder a dating service or social media company? If Facebook starts offering a dating feature in app and becomes the biggest player in the dating space, which market is facebook in? Both? If both, does all of facebook's market cap/DAU/whatever metric we settle on to measure market share get f…

This comment is downvoted, but he raises a valid point aside from the scare quotes. How exactly will it work?

[deleted]

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#397

Post by lolinder »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #375
siliconc0w wrote: post #323

IMO, if your market share is bigger than ${some number}, you shouldn't be able to deny service without a documented reason, it should have some sort of time-to-live (i.e 1 year), and there should be an appeals process. In a functioning marketplace, companies would be naturally incentivized to care about customers but that stops working in uncompetitive industries (which currently describes most of the economy).

You're almost there. Companies that aren't competitive should be broken up.

What would it mean to break up Tinder? How do you partition a company that only has one product?

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#398

Post by mongol »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #65
hetspookjee wrote: post #34

Given the constant commodization of data science, I wonder how long it will take till there is a dating app that really knows you well, while keeping privacy in tact. And matches people with the goal to actually match properly. Tinder, and every dating app I know out there, is directly incentivized to _not_ match properly, but rather to keep you on the app as long as possible. As long as the bottom line is directly i…

I think you've answered your own question: probably never. Because whatever company would apply said commoditized data science would have the same incentives as Tinder and the rest. So except for some "open source" or otherwise "community-driven" effort, I don't think we'll ever see it. The issue with setting this up in your garage is that for such an app to work, you need to have many users. And to have many users,…

Imagine if a company had this business idea: If you get married to someone we introduce to you, you pay us 10000 USD. Else you pay us nothing. Would not that raise the bar?

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#399

Post by whitepaint »

polote wrote: post #91
wayoutthere wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a woman, Tinder is fine if you wanna find a fuck buddy and don’t take it seriously. I see a lot of people (men and women) get wrapped up in the swipe game and that’s really not how it works. You can’t take anything that happens on that platform personally. Unfortunately, rule #1 on tinder is “be physically attractive”. If you want tinder to work for you consistently as a man, get your personal hygiene in order and…

> rule #1 on tinder is “be physically attractive” For guys it used to be right, now rule #1 is more "be super attractive" or "be attractive and don't have standard" For girls rule #1 is "be a girl"

Sorry, but you really gotta lose this attitude man.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#400

Post by errcorrectcode »

siliconc0w wrote: post #323

IMO, if your market share is bigger than ${some number}, you shouldn't be able to deny service without a documented reason, it should have some sort of time-to-live (i.e 1 year), and there should be an appeals process. In a functioning marketplace, companies would be naturally incentivized to care about customers but that stops working in uncompetitive industries (which currently describes most of the economy).

Inverted totalitarianism symptoms may include shutting an individual out of a large portion of their life for no real reason, for a misunderstanding, or for daring to challenge corporate power. Often this occurs with minimal or no human intervention, and lack of due process becomes normalized. Welcome to Dystopian Hell, population: everyone not digitally cancelled.
Post reply on HN