Live data from Hacker News

Never pay for online dating (2010)

web.archive.org

471–480 of 495 posts

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#471
post #453
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could also be built using the Signal model.

Get funded indirectly by the NSA to undermine effective cryptosystems?

Sorry, what? Source?

We’re not still confusing bypassing encryption by compromising device security with “[undermining] effective cryptosystems” like those articles when everyone was leaving WhatsApp?

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Far from your Burger King straw men, there's even a very famous study, out of the UK if I'm not mistaken, that confirmed the thesis of black women being the least attractive group across the whole spectrum of major ethnic groups. I mean, there must be one group, out of all, that would score lower than the others ain't there? Reality doesn't have to be politically correct at the end of the day.

Strangely, There doesn't have to be just one with a lower score than the others. One of the weirdest things about being human is that our preferences are neither rational nor consistent. The classic example in behavioural economics is with ice-cream flavors. If I prefer chocolate to strawberry and strawberry to vanilla, it doesn't follow that I prefer chocolate to vanilla. The preferences aren't transitive, and there…

But economists assume that preferences have a total order otherwise there wouldn't be a utility curve.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle to see how this is different than the real world of strangers. If you go out anywhere you are around people. Some you find attractive some that may find you attractive. Yet, you probably never even speak to each other so visibility isn't really the problem. The fact it’s a dating app, just means you have some expectations. You expect you may get a date. But you may not. You expect those other people are re…

Volume and effort. Likes and such are distracting as they are attract the wrong people (attention seekers) or give off the wrong impression (false flags). The former is very prominent against men, the latter is very prominent against women. Volume exasperates both this problem and the problem of choice. There are so many choices for so little effort, people are drowning in it and not investing enough to feel attached…

ghosting occurs because despite that people complain about it, they would resent even more being told that they don't make the cut. ghosting is a little disappointment each day, and it fades as the days accumulate.

and if you still don't like it, just accept that the other person does like it, and it's a kindness you could extend to them.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#474
post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well how about we start a non-profit dating app? I was just wondering how much it could cost to run the backend with todays cloud services. With what Tinder is charging for boosts and subscriptions I feel like they're raking it in. But I've never developed and deployed a fully cloud based app, just used a bunch of their services off and on.

https://github.com/Alovoa/alovoa

Nice effort but I'm thinking more of a cloud-native app. Simply because if it's to be non-profit, it should be as cheap as possible. And RDS with MariaDB does not fit. Alovoa seems more aimed at self-hosting.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#475
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup I paid for online dating around when this article was written and it was one of the best decisions of my life!

I am happy for you but I think if you met your wife in a car crash (I knew a person this happened to for real!) I don't think you would say a great way to meet people is car crashes. Also, maybe OKC was better than some. I think dating apps would be creepy, but to be fair I am a person who married before they were that popular. I have a college age son who is in a committed relationship with someone he met through fr…

The world has moved online. Many people move for work and recreating strong social spheres is near impossible.

At any rate it’s easier to find someone nice with things in common online.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It also seems extremely gross that you're initially pushed to buy Tinder Gold, but then only afterward realise there are still features locked behind Tinder Platinum, and even after that you'll probably spend still more buying packs of boosts and super-likes. I know they're far from the only game in town, but this really feels like the behaviour of a monopoly entity that knows it can do basically whatever.

If I were an unethical data scientist working at Tinder, I would actually reserve the best matches until later in the period, after the initial flurry of "visibility" subsides a bit. That way you are less likely to immediately find a good date or two in the first few matches, helping to ensure that you will not just unsubscribe next month, while providing you with enough tantalizing options that you think it makes se…

One of the protagonists in the book Version Control works in customer service in a role a lot like you're describing, it's a great read for anyone into sci-fi https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25733442-version-control

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been married since before Tinder so never used it. But I think the “Dating App problem” is something of a head scratcher. The reason the apps all have problems is because Dating is the problem. It’s hard. Always has been. Finding a lifelong partner, very hard. I might be wrong but these types of conversations about how bad the apps are make me think y’all are expecting some sort of technological easy button. It…

Honestly, the worst part about dating apps is that it's basically become the only way a lot of women want to meet men. And I'm not speaking from a disgruntled male perspective, I'm speaking from a friend of a lot of women who've essentially stated exactly that. It's funny because most of my LTIR friends have met their significant others through more traditional means and the perpetually single are stuck on gamified a…

I highly doubt most women would reject a male asking for a date IRL but not in Tinder or whatever. I think the preference for online dating is simply convenience, taking the path of least resistance.

IMO taking this path of least resistance is a bad idea, especially much so for males who make up the vast majority of dating app users. Meeting people and asking them out takes some courage and makes you stand out from the crowd. That’s the main reason why it can work so well, in online dating you’re just one face among others.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You people take it to far. I am not talking about some dystopian government that forces marriages to create some kind of super-citizen. I just want the incentive of making profit removed and provide a decent service that does what it promises. If that service can only be provided at a loss (which seems to be the case) then let the state do it. Nobody would force anyone to use it.

Sure, but it's a slippery slope, and there are other ways to reduce the profit motive, like grant/donation-based non-profits or public benefit corporations. Well-intentioned government mandates have a nasty habit of being used coercively when authoritarian-minded administrations get their turn at the helm.

As if non-profits wouldn't have any agendas...

Publicly-run (= by government) open source script would be most transparent I guess. Otherwise some sort of algorithm would sneak in sooner or later.

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Match has turned all of its apps into tinder. That is, gambling-like "one more swipe" photo centric dating apps, where the artificial restriction of choice keeps every person starved. Tinder is casual hookups, okcupid is leftist tinder for relationships, Hinge is politically moderate tinder for traditionalists, and so on. Each is a different marketing segment, but the same basic idea that gets men to pay to meet wome…

> okcupid is leftist tinder for relationships LOL Some people are going to take this the wrong way, but I've never read a more true statement. I'm a pretty liberal person (folks think I'm conservative because I think communism stinks), but my experience with OkCupid many years ago was that most of its users were self-proclaimed cultural Marxists or feminists with a bone to pick. My digital head was decapitated severa…

>self-proclaimed cultural Marxists

(X) Doubt

"The term "Cultural Marxism" refers to a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims that Western Marxism is the basis of continuing academic and intellectual efforts to subvert Western culture" [0]

No one "self proclaims" that.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_th...

Re: Never pay for online dating (2010)

#480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, after sampling the interactions of 1.51 million people, and analysing the amount of messages an average tall woman receives compared to an average short woman, the conclusion that "taller women, on average, are less attractive to the average male than short women" is invalid? Please, tell me how this is absurd, when it's basically what you see in real life. Or that men that make more money are more attractive to…

because they're all people who signed up for okcupid, who were actively using okcupid to date at the time . the amount of pressure this puts on the sampling is hard to understate. not only are you looking at a highly truncated set of interpersonal dynamics (what you can tell about someone based on a dating profile is far less than what you can tell by meeting real people in meat space), you're specifically selecting…

An analogy would be to conclude, after going to a Mensa meeting, that most smart people are socially inept :)
Post reply on HN