Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 1451 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#dating#date#match#app#apps#don#relationships#someone#long#term

Discussion (41 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

triceratops23 minutes ago
Dating apps shouldn't exist. Period.

No good can come from letting a company become load-bearing in an activity humans were able to do for free since time immemorial - find a partner.

(Yes I'm aware some traditional societies had/have professional matchmakers)

lesuorac14 minutes ago
So we should ban recreational kickball?

Seems foolish to me to ban technology from dating given how much time people invest into it.

triceratops8 minutes ago
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize"

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

In any case this is a non-sequitur. Recreational kickball isn't a dating app.

I don't think it's possible legally to "ban technology" from this space. "Dating apps should not exist" was aspirational, not a call for a legal ban.

armchairhackerabout 2 hours ago
> Bumble says it will ditch swiping features in favor of AI-powered matchmaking

This should be the title

ryanchants29 minutes ago
They're recommender systems already, which is AI-powered, so how exactly are they changing?
AndrewKemendo25 minutes ago
People are aware of it now

So they don’t like it because “AI” is scary to ignorant people

drcongoabout 1 hour ago
Indeed, I initially thought this was about a dating app called Swipe.
efilife37 minutes ago
There would be no confusion if every word wasn't capitalized
sublinearabout 1 hour ago
I find it interesting that this niche manages to survive, and that the most common takes are attacks on the gimmicks rather than the quality of the people signing up.

The last time any dating apps were "good" was when they weren't apps, but websites. People on these sites back then weren't really trying to optimize for anything. Many were honest and had realistic expectations. It was considered a bit loserish because it's the digital version of the want ads. Of course, everyone likes piña coladas.

Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles. People understood that low risk meant low reward, but hey it was either that or no date at all.

In other words, this was always a pretty bad scene. What changed is the marketing angle more poised to take advantage of the naive. Making it shiny because computers isn't really working anymore. It's crazy it ever did.

triceratops14 minutes ago
> Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles

The per-event odds of finding love by going out drinking and joining new social circles are low. But the odds of making some great memories in the process are pretty high*. At least better compared to the alternative of sitting at home and swiping on an app.

* There's an entire TV show based on this premise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Met_Your_Mother

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmabout 1 hour ago
On dating apps, men will always be the customer and women are the product. You cannot fix this asymmetry due to how attraction works and the risks involved between men and women. Ironically Instagram is 'the' dating app as you can vet people better and see if they have any social proof. Real life skips a lot of the BS altogether.

I can't ever see anything improving. They will just learn how to manipulate men further into paying, where you suddenly get swarmed with likes then get nothing for a period then get swarmed again so you remain hooked and eventually pay.

pannyabout 2 hours ago
Dating apps don't have incentive to match you up. When they do, they lose a customer.
jerojeroabout 1 hour ago
Its a little bit of a balance act, they want to match you with someone that's good enough to date a couple times but not enough to date long term.

I think the mathematics work better if they match you with "mostly compatible" people rather than "not compatible at all". Success stories are important because that's how you build recognition.

Now a days though, match group owns all dating apps so they have a monopoly in dating. Whenever a new app comes to market that's "better" (which will be, in its initial stages) they acquire. Users migrate and then they ruin. Rinse and repeat.

They recently acquired sniffies (a gay cruising app) for like 100M. Go figure.

pannyabout 1 hour ago
I've looked into match group before, they're the usual suspects (Blackrock, Vanguard) and practice lawfare. If you don't take their buyout (like how bumble refused) then they try to sue you with software patents which I thought were all basically invalidated in Alice v. CLS Bank. But yeah, they're not a nice group of people who want to match you up. They're in it for money. And the way match group operates makes others reluctant to enter the market, unless they are just looking for a big buyout payday.
lesuorac11 minutes ago
There's 3 glaring problems here.

1. There's a steady stream of unmarried individuals so as you match people up there's more people (either just from growing older or divorce) that can use the app.

2. If you don't already own a dating app, then even if you cannibalize the market you can still make a large sum of money. Akin to mining all the gold in a plot of land; sure your company needs to close once its gone but you made money in the interium.

2.5. If you do already own a dating app, if you're known for not working then people will stop using the app and go to a competitor (assuming you didn't buy them all ...)

bitmasher9about 1 hour ago
I actually think a Facebook or Instagram might be in the best position to offer dating with the goal of permanent matching.

* Recruit friends to make recommendations mimics classic searching techniques

* Can scope out a more complete bio early in the process, for both AI and Human filtering/matching

* Their long term incentives will be meet if they post cute couple pictures or generate new long term users

deltoidmaximusabout 1 hour ago
Facebook apparently already has a dating app. I've heard anecdotally it is much better than the match group apps, maybe for older age ranges? I'm married and haven't used dating sites in over 20 years.

In theory the 'knows people you know' thing is a good vetting system for finding people to date though.

aurareturnabout 1 hour ago
LinkedIn is. But they won't do it.
bitmasher922 minutes ago
Just what we need, Microsoft to suck the joy out of another aspect of our life.
lifisabout 1 hour ago
That is only the case if people enter exclusive relationships. But if someone has access to a dating app or system that works really well, there is little reason to do that.
throw310822about 2 hours ago
Breeze has a really cool formula in which you pay exclusively for each date. And a date is organised automatically for each match, without any possibility to chat beforehand.
aurareturnabout 1 hour ago
You still have to match first. So the same swipe left or right but once you match, there is a system that asks when you're free for a date. That's it.
throw310822about 1 hour ago
Not exactly, you only have a very limited amount of profiles visible every day. About 4, though maybe it depends on the location. So there is no endless swiping. You also cannot match anyone else until you have set up a date with your last match, and if you opt out too many times (again, probably three or four) your account gets blocked.

In any case, you only pay for dates you go to (unless you cancel at the last moment). Their incentive is to send you to as many dates as possible.

Yoricabout 1 hour ago
Unless I'm missing something, this sounds awful.
Schiendelmanabout 1 hour ago
When was the last time you went on a date with someone new? I ask because it's likely less awful than the current state.
throw310822about 1 hour ago
Why does it? I'm curious. I think it solves most of the issues of the traditional apps. (But yes, I didn't mention a fundamental aspect: they propose you only a very limited amount of profiles each day, no endless swiping: if you don't fancy any of your daily ~4, tough luck, you can come back tomorrow).
harimau777about 1 hour ago
How do you verify that they are who the profile says they are without chatting beforehand?
throw310822about 1 hour ago
You don't. You go to the date (in a public place, set by the app) and if there's something fishy about them you can report them to the app (there's an explicit feedback request after each date).
nathanaldensr42 minutes ago
This does absolutely nothing to address the underlying social, economic, and ideological reasons why new relationship formation is struggling so much, especially with Gen Z. It's not a technological problem, in other words.

I won't go into my personal explanations here as I'll just be downvoted into oblivion (there are other forums for that discussion) but I will say this: without men and women having reasons to be in relationships--especially long-term reasons--then relationships won't happen. It's proving easier to get our needs met outside of relationships.

RiverCrochet20 minutes ago
> without men and women having reasons to be in relationships--especially long-term reasons--then relationships won't happen.

I'm actually fine with this. I'm not sure I want to be around the same person constantly for longer than a few years and I'm glad modern life allows me to do that. Leaving my family when I became an adult was the best thing I ever did.

I'm sure someone out there's thinking or about to say "families are the basis of a stable society" and that's incorrect. The basis of a stable society is having enough money. Without that, families are simply going to be a performative thing to satisfy angry people and/or busybodies.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm38 minutes ago
>I won't go into my personal explanations here as I'll just be downvoted into oblivion

Enlighten us.

recursivedoubtsabout 1 hour ago
as surely as water will wet us

as surely as fire will burn

the gods of the copybook headings

with terror and slaughter return

smitty1eabout 1 hour ago
When y'all get tired of this faffing about: pursue a suitable community of faith; date an actual person of the opposite gender until Destiny (and other wise eyes) indicate a match; marry, and let two be a large value of one; have or adopt some children; enjoy the fullness of life in all its seasons.

The old formula has endured and shan't be supplanted by these fancy gizmos.

harimau777about 1 hour ago
The problem is that doesn't actually work. I've spent my entire life active in communities of faith and that certainly has never involved, helped with, or facilitated a date let alone a long term relationship.
hattmallabout 1 hour ago
I find that so incredibly hard to believe, in my experience it's like the primary purpose of people in relationships past a certain age is to play matchmaker.

It seems inevitable if you are consistently around people and known to be single that they will try to set you up with *someone.

harimau77718 minutes ago
I think that a lot of the problem is that most churches are full of people who are over 60 so there are often few eligable single people.
b3ing28 minutes ago
Church is one of the worst places to try to date and that’s not the purpose. The only purpose of church is worship, not socialization or politics or pushing an agenda or judgment
triceratops5 minutes ago
> Church is one of the worst places to try to date and that’s not the purpose

This is surprising to me. I'd think churches would be overjoyed about congregants dating, getting married, and having children (who then go on to attend church).