3 ms·

Heuristics like this make a lot of assumptions that are heteronormative. Tinder for example took years to finally come around, and in the interim if you were tr

by rl3 5y ago

Heuristics like this make a lot of assumptions that are heteronormative. Tinder for example took years to finally come around, and in the interim if you were trans, bisexual, polyamorous, or otherwise different, you were basically garbage as far as their algorithm was concerned. That said, I think it makes sense to just re-frame your argument as examining the merits of platforms catering to desirable users. I've seen arguments attempting to justify why this is necessary, most having to do with keeping the platform alive, else the platform experiences a flight of said desirable users and everybody loses. I don't buy it. The real reason is monetization. If a platform takes steps to ensure only the most desirable users match with the most desirable users by making it a zero-sum competition, then it's essentially preying on users' psychology such that they keep dumping money into the platform in hopes of obtaining what's seemingly out of their reach. It's a really profitable albeit sick business model. Tinder in particular is notorious for this. New accounts get good results until they don't, but suddenly do again once money is supplied. However, the amount of money users need to surrender to sustain those results keeps going up over time, and they'll fuck with your account visibility in a completely opaque manner in order to keep that money coming.

AussieWog93 5y ago
I haven't used online dating in almost a decade (OKCupid circa 2012), so aren't familiar with their predatory practices, but I don't think you need an algorithm or even any form of gatekeeper at all to lead to a situation where undesirable people have almost no opportunities and desirable people have more opportunities than they know what to do with. This has been the case for basically all of human history (if not longer) across a broad spectrum of different domains. If the platforms are deliberately fostering this dynamic or exploiting it for profit at the expense of their users' mental health, that's of course unethical. I don't think it's a new thing that they've created, though.
- rl3 5y ago
  >If the platforms are deliberately fostering this dynamic or exploiting it for profit at the expense of their users' mental health, that's of course unethical. They are. Some platforms do this, most notoriously Tinder. Did their engineers sit there and say "Aha, let's be evil!"? No, of course not. Things like this happen via a combination of apathy, and focusing primarily on business metrics. It's a black box with every aspect built for monetization. Whether its ill effects satisfy the definition of deliberate is semantics at that point. The tragic part, is these dating apps have become so widely popular that they've nearly monopolized the dating scene. Most non-technical users don't care about the nuance of this stuff, so that's how they get away with it. The crux is this: these systems have created conditions where desirable people fall into the cracks for reasons that are purely algorithmic, and there's nothing those people can do about it.

by rl3 5y ago

AussieWog93 5y ago

I haven't used online dating in almost a decade (OKCupid circa 2012), so aren't familiar with their predatory practices, but I don't think you need an algorithm or even any form of gatekeeper at all to lead to a situation where undesirable people have almost no opportunities and desirable people have more opportunities than they know what to do with. This has been the case for basically all of human history (if not longer) across a broad spectrum of different domains. If the platforms are deliberately fostering this dynamic or exploiting it for profit at the expense of their users' mental health, that's of course unethical. I don't think it's a new thing that they've created, though.

rl3 5y ago
>If the platforms are deliberately fostering this dynamic or exploiting it for profit at the expense of their users' mental health, that's of course unethical. They are. Some platforms do this, most notoriously Tinder. Did their engineers sit there and say "Aha, let's be evil!"? No, of course not. Things like this happen via a combination of apathy, and focusing primarily on business metrics. It's a black box with every aspect built for monetization. Whether its ill effects satisfy the definition of deliberate is semantics at that point. The tragic part, is these dating apps have become so widely popular that they've nearly monopolized the dating scene. Most non-technical users don't care about the nuance of this stuff, so that's how they get away with it. The crux is this: these systems have created conditions where desirable people fall into the cracks for reasons that are purely algorithmic, and there's nothing those people can do about it.