8 ms·

I previously worked for a company in internet dating and I implemented a matching algorithm that actively segregated people according to their language, country

by EZ-E 8y ago

I previously worked for a company in internet dating and I implemented a matching algorithm that actively segregated people according to their language, country, income, race and education. For example we would match people differently if they were assumed poor, rich, black, white, etc I don't regret working there per see, I didn't make the rules, but it opened my eyes that the dream of everyone being treated equally on the internet is dying. Before, you could assume the internet wouldn't discriminate because it's digital and detached from your physical self, but more and more companies have profiles about you and your experience will vary depending on who you are.

gronne 8y ago
“everyone being treated equally on the internet” never heard of this phenomenon before. Stray thought: if you are not anonymous - you will be subject to discrimination. if you are anonymous and others not - you will be subject to discrimination. if everyone is anonymous you can’t discriminate - but its not very useful.
- EZ-E 8y ago
  I have a bit of an hard time articulating what I mean (ESL), but what I mean is that these days depending on what profile companies have on you (your assumed interests, income, education etc), your experience on the internet, apps will differ more and more. In order to improve retention and engagement, they will try to tailor the experience and give you what they think you want instead of letting you get it yourself, effectively creating a bubble around you. In the context of my comment (internet dating company), it means even when you try to meet new people, we will make broad assumptions and present you people we think will match well with your assumed race, income, education. All for upping that retention a few .1% In earlier internet, the experience on a single website, for example, was the same for everybody, no matter your demographic. I understand why it evolved, but I regret it a bit.
  - gronne 8y ago
    Thank you for the elaboration. Good point.
    - hndamien 8y ago
      I wonder if Tinder does matching based on my device type as a proxy for income....
      - gronne 8y ago
        Who knows. I don’t think it would be the best proxy - these days everyone and their dog has an iphone.
        hndamien 8y ago
        I'd say there is at least some correlation. Not a great indicator, but better than nothing and helpful since it is in the user agent. They aren't curing cancer, so accuracy is less important.
  - gitgud 8y ago
    I find this so relatable, Instagram and YouTube especially, have refined intense recommendation algorithms that make me wonder.... Are they just showing me what I want to see?
- ThePadawan 8y ago
  The thought of "original internet equality" brought me back to the days where you would land on obscure forums via a search engine, and you would find posts by accounts like "str_master", "jsmith", "quizboy". The most you could discriminate them by was their number of posts on that forum, moderator privileges etc.
- KineticLensman 8y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you're_a_dog https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_know... Classic cartoon from 1993 celebrating the equality of the anonymous internet
- unmole 8y ago
  On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_...
- otakucode 8y ago
  Not useful? It was tremendously useful when I was a kid. I could participate in online discussions, make friends, learn things, and have all manner of fun without worrying about someone persecuting me over my age. No one ever felt any need to prod me about my gender, age, nationality, religious persuasion, or anything like that. Communities were organized around topics, and reputation was built from the ground up. It was quite useful, I assure you.
sl1ck731 8y ago
I mean...is that bad? You're more likely to "connect" with someone who is closer in both location and culture.
- askmike 8y ago
  Statistically it might make sense to segregate and discriminate groups of people. But morally? It's like how the public wouldn't really accept that if statistics show that all planes are blown up by people from country X, everyone from country X is thoroughly searched and no one else. Also note that in case of the dating app, if you assume people like X want to date with people like Y and you don't allow them to match anyone else you, you can never validate/improve your assumptions.
  - kbenson 8y ago
    Well, depending on how the service marketed itself, I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that. If people want to use an internet dating site to find someone they are happy with, and if they are more likely to be happy with someone similar to them, then you are providing what they asked for. If they find they aren't happy with similar people, I'm sure there are other dating services which deliver that specifically. It's not our job and it's not right to force our values on others because we think it will make them better people when that's not what they asked for. That said, I think it would be different if a news organization was doing the equivalent, and serving items that confirmed prior ideas. the difference there is that in one case they are asking to be happy, and in the other they are asking to be informed. This does of course assume people actually want to be informed and news isn't just an entertainment medium for the customer as well now...
    - sl1ck731 8y ago
      This was my line of reasoning as well. You can't tailor an entire business around the 1% of cases where a sheep herder in Asia and a multimillionaire from Texas really hit it off.
    - sbarre 8y ago
beefeater 8y ago
What's wrong with that algorithm? Black people are more likely to date black people, white people are more likely to date white people, and rich people are more likely to date rich people. By tailoring the matching algorithm to take this into account, you increase the chance your users will find a good match. This seems user friendly to me. Were you also offended that the algorithm matched people differently based on age?

by EZ-E 8y ago

gronne 8y ago

“everyone being treated equally on the internet” never heard of this phenomenon before. Stray thought: if you are not anonymous - you will be subject to discrimination. if you are anonymous and others not - you will be subject to discrimination. if everyone is anonymous you can’t discriminate - but its not very useful.

EZ-E 8y ago
I have a bit of an hard time articulating what I mean (ESL), but what I mean is that these days depending on what profile companies have on you (your assumed interests, income, education etc), your experience on the internet, apps will differ more and more. In order to improve retention and engagement, they will try to tailor the experience and give you what they think you want instead of letting you get it yourself, effectively creating a bubble around you. In the context of my comment (internet dating company), it means even when you try to meet new people, we will make broad assumptions and present you people we think will match well with your assumed race, income, education. All for upping that retention a few .1% In earlier internet, the experience on a single website, for example, was the same for everybody, no matter your demographic. I understand why it evolved, but I regret it a bit.
- gronne 8y ago
  Thank you for the elaboration. Good point.
  - hndamien 8y ago
    I wonder if Tinder does matching based on my device type as a proxy for income....
    - gronne 8y ago
      Who knows. I don’t think it would be the best proxy - these days everyone and their dog has an iphone.
      - hndamien 8y ago
        I'd say there is at least some correlation. Not a great indicator, but better than nothing and helpful since it is in the user agent. They aren't curing cancer, so accuracy is less important.
- gitgud 8y ago
  I find this so relatable, Instagram and YouTube especially, have refined intense recommendation algorithms that make me wonder.... Are they just showing me what I want to see?
ThePadawan 8y ago
The thought of "original internet equality" brought me back to the days where you would land on obscure forums via a search engine, and you would find posts by accounts like "str_master", "jsmith", "quizboy". The most you could discriminate them by was their number of posts on that forum, moderator privileges etc.
KineticLensman 8y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you're_a_dog https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_know... Classic cartoon from 1993 celebrating the equality of the anonymous internet
unmole 8y ago
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_...
otakucode 8y ago
Not useful? It was tremendously useful when I was a kid. I could participate in online discussions, make friends, learn things, and have all manner of fun without worrying about someone persecuting me over my age. No one ever felt any need to prod me about my gender, age, nationality, religious persuasion, or anything like that. Communities were organized around topics, and reputation was built from the ground up. It was quite useful, I assure you.

sl1ck731 8y ago

I mean...is that bad? You're more likely to "connect" with someone who is closer in both location and culture.

askmike 8y ago
Statistically it might make sense to segregate and discriminate groups of people. But morally? It's like how the public wouldn't really accept that if statistics show that all planes are blown up by people from country X, everyone from country X is thoroughly searched and no one else. Also note that in case of the dating app, if you assume people like X want to date with people like Y and you don't allow them to match anyone else you, you can never validate/improve your assumptions.
- kbenson 8y ago
  Well, depending on how the service marketed itself, I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that. If people want to use an internet dating site to find someone they are happy with, and if they are more likely to be happy with someone similar to them, then you are providing what they asked for. If they find they aren't happy with similar people, I'm sure there are other dating services which deliver that specifically. It's not our job and it's not right to force our values on others because we think it will make them better people when that's not what they asked for. That said, I think it would be different if a news organization was doing the equivalent, and serving items that confirmed prior ideas. the difference there is that in one case they are asking to be happy, and in the other they are asking to be informed. This does of course assume people actually want to be informed and news isn't just an entertainment medium for the customer as well now...
  - sl1ck731 8y ago
    This was my line of reasoning as well. You can't tailor an entire business around the 1% of cases where a sheep herder in Asia and a multimillionaire from Texas really hit it off.
  - sbarre 8y ago

beefeater 8y ago

What's wrong with that algorithm? Black people are more likely to date black people, white people are more likely to date white people, and rich people are more likely to date rich people. By tailoring the matching algorithm to take this into account, you increase the chance your users will find a good match. This seems user friendly to me. Were you also offended that the algorithm matched people differently based on age?