3 ms·

I am interested in how dating apps are changing humanity. Starting with three assumptions: 1. Over several generations of successful partnering, Human cognitio

I am interested in how dating apps are changing humanity. Starting with three assumptions: 1. Over several generations of successful partnering, Human cognition has become really good at estimating someone's "rank" as a potential mate (in the stable marriage problem sense). 2. Language, modern UX design schemes and dating apps do not have sufficient bandwidth to communicate all the signals needed to "rank" a potential mate. 3. Dating apps present the lowest bandwidth signals first (photograph, age, height etc) and expand out to higher bandwidth signals after an initial screening (Language, communication, cultural similarity etc in messages). Putting these ideas together, it's possible that dating apps will reward an entire generation for optimizing for those narrow range of signals that work well on dating apps (and not reward investing into developing a well rounded personality). I would think that being good at Instagram, TikTok and Photoshop might almost become evolutionary advantages for today's 14 year olds as they grow older and start seeking partners. How will this change our society after 5-6 generations of descendants who all found partners on dating apps? Should schools begin to teach 8 year olds how to photoshop away their bad hair days because one day it will become an essential skill to being successful at one of the most important human experiences?

kennywinker 6y ago
A contest is only an evolutionary advantage if the winners reproduce more, or more successfully, than the losers. So assuming you're not having babies with everyone you match with on tinder, having a large number of matches isn't actually an increase in fitness. I haven't seen any evidence that people who don't do well on dating apps don't actually end up reproducing... in fact it's possible less success in that realm could be correlated with stronger relationships when you do find someone - since you don't feel you have a million other options waiting in the wings. Now having large number of matches means you have more to choose from, so perhaps you're likely to get a "better" partner - but this seems like it would be a fairly weak and therefore slow-acting selection bias.
- gowld 6y ago
  Evolutionary success isn't about stronger relationships, it's about having more sex with less birth control and a basically safe environment for childhood survival. A male in unstable relationships can have far more offspring than a man in stable relationship, as can (to a lesser exteny) a woman who is so unstable that her children are adopted.
  - threatofrain 6y ago
    Including a doctor who uses his own sperm at a sperm bank, which happens from time to time. https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/europe/jan-karbaat-fertility-doctor-scli-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/europe/jan-karbaat-fertility-...
  - kennywinker 6y ago
    I was meaning stronger relationships, as in ones that are more likely to get to "let's have kids". But I'll meet you at your point, is stability in a relationship a bad strategy? My answers would be: 1. it's debatable 2. there are multiple viable strategies 3. any theory about what increases fitness needs testing and ones like this are very hard to prove or disprove since the signals are noisy. > A male in unstable relationships can have far more offspring than a man in stable relationship Theoretically can have, sure. But that doesn't instantly translate to that being a higher fitness strategy. For example - does that strategy work in practice, or only in theory? And if it does, what is the success of those offspring? An individual's reproductive success is only as good as their offspring's reproductive success. It's quite possible kids from stable homes are more likely to have more kids than those from unstable homes for a million subtle reasons.
lotsofpulp 6y ago
>3. Dating apps present the lowest bandwidth signals first (photograph, age, height etc) and expand out to higher bandwidth signals after an initial screening (Language, communication, cultural similarity etc in messages). The rest can be usually be surmised with a quick chat about where you grew up/live, the universities you attended, the firm you work at, and what you do for a living. After that, any nuances would probably require spending time with the other person, when the other person finally lets their guard down and you can see who they might be in the long term. It could also be trivial for one of these dating apps to pull credit reports and incorporate them when offering matches, as well as asking the candidates to submit their last 3 to 5 years of tax returns.
tropdrop 6y ago
The lowest bandwidth signals are not enough to secure reproductive success. It would be enough only in the scenario where the lured (with a nice photo) dating app user is immediately kidnapped when meeting the photo fabricator for the first time (and "prompted," to put it delicately, to reproduce). Even then, there is birth control. The higher bandwidth signals (shared values, etc.) are what is used to determine a suitable match for reproduction, especially in more developed societies. You can see those values occasionally supersede actual romantic compatibility when it is common in some professionally competitive places (less time for dating - Bay Area, New York...) for two people in their 30s to agree to have a child together outside of marriage and with shared custody only because they a) want a child b) have not yet found a suitable romantic partner c) the reproductive "partner" has shared values That, in my opinion, is more likely to change humanity, especially as the above article demonstrates how much harder dating has become for everyone.
galfarragem 6y ago
The rules of the game will remain the same (or even get worse for males): almost all females will reproduce (if they decide to do so) while a relevant chunk of males will not manage to do it. As an extreme example remember how reproduction works in an animal farm.

kennywinker 6y ago

A contest is only an evolutionary advantage if the winners reproduce more, or more successfully, than the losers. So assuming you're not having babies with everyone you match with on tinder, having a large number of matches isn't actually an increase in fitness. I haven't seen any evidence that people who don't do well on dating apps don't actually end up reproducing... in fact it's possible less success in that realm could be correlated with stronger relationships when you do find someone - since you don't feel you have a million other options waiting in the wings. Now having large number of matches means you have more to choose from, so perhaps you're likely to get a "better" partner - but this seems like it would be a fairly weak and therefore slow-acting selection bias.

gowld 6y ago
Evolutionary success isn't about stronger relationships, it's about having more sex with less birth control and a basically safe environment for childhood survival. A male in unstable relationships can have far more offspring than a man in stable relationship, as can (to a lesser exteny) a woman who is so unstable that her children are adopted.
- threatofrain 6y ago
  Including a doctor who uses his own sperm at a sperm bank, which happens from time to time. https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/europe/jan-karbaat-fertility-doctor-scli-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/europe/jan-karbaat-fertility-...
- kennywinker 6y ago
  I was meaning stronger relationships, as in ones that are more likely to get to "let's have kids". But I'll meet you at your point, is stability in a relationship a bad strategy? My answers would be: 1. it's debatable 2. there are multiple viable strategies 3. any theory about what increases fitness needs testing and ones like this are very hard to prove or disprove since the signals are noisy. > A male in unstable relationships can have far more offspring than a man in stable relationship Theoretically can have, sure. But that doesn't instantly translate to that being a higher fitness strategy. For example - does that strategy work in practice, or only in theory? And if it does, what is the success of those offspring? An individual's reproductive success is only as good as their offspring's reproductive success. It's quite possible kids from stable homes are more likely to have more kids than those from unstable homes for a million subtle reasons.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

>3. Dating apps present the lowest bandwidth signals first (photograph, age, height etc) and expand out to higher bandwidth signals after an initial screening (Language, communication, cultural similarity etc in messages). The rest can be usually be surmised with a quick chat about where you grew up/live, the universities you attended, the firm you work at, and what you do for a living. After that, any nuances would probably require spending time with the other person, when the other person finally lets their guard down and you can see who they might be in the long term. It could also be trivial for one of these dating apps to pull credit reports and incorporate them when offering matches, as well as asking the candidates to submit their last 3 to 5 years of tax returns.

tropdrop 6y ago

The lowest bandwidth signals are not enough to secure reproductive success. It would be enough only in the scenario where the lured (with a nice photo) dating app user is immediately kidnapped when meeting the photo fabricator for the first time (and "prompted," to put it delicately, to reproduce). Even then, there is birth control. The higher bandwidth signals (shared values, etc.) are what is used to determine a suitable match for reproduction, especially in more developed societies. You can see those values occasionally supersede actual romantic compatibility when it is common in some professionally competitive places (less time for dating - Bay Area, New York...) for two people in their 30s to agree to have a child together outside of marriage and with shared custody only because they a) want a child b) have not yet found a suitable romantic partner c) the reproductive "partner" has shared values That, in my opinion, is more likely to change humanity, especially as the above article demonstrates how much harder dating has become for everyone.

galfarragem 6y ago

The rules of the game will remain the same (or even get worse for males): almost all females will reproduce (if they decide to do so) while a relevant chunk of males will not manage to do it. As an extreme example remember how reproduction works in an animal farm.