5 ms·

> With the exception of Bumble and Grindr, almost every popular American dating app is owned by a single company called Match Group, including Hinge, Tinder, Ma

by lapcat 3y ago

> With the exception of Bumble and Grindr, almost every popular American dating app is owned by a single company called Match Group, including Hinge, Tinder, Match.com, OkCupid, Plenty of Fish, and many others. This is truly a nightmare. How did we allow such a crucial human function, finding a mate, to become monopolized? Both Democrats and Republicans need to date (though maybe not each other), so the issue should be bipartisan. I feel like ever since Microsoft got a slap on the wrist back in 2001 (a few days before 9/11), antitrust law has more or less ceased to exist.

toasted-subs 3y ago
One company who owes all of dating apps which decides almost a third of all relationships means they are responsible for almost every negative thing that happens. The job is also a bit too germanic for me, they are effective causing a holocaust.
- water9 3y ago
  3 Keys to dating: Workout don’t talk about yourself don’t be reactive.
  - pmg102 3y ago
    Maybe don't talk incessantly about yourself. But I think being open about your thoughts, feelings, fears and hopes is attractive. What do you mean by "reactive" here?
- jrflowers 3y ago
  I am sure that your problem is apps. The impulse to label things you don’t like as holocausts is endearing and sure to attract myriad possible mates
veave 3y ago
You can find a mate without using a smartphone, you know...
- lapcat 3y ago
  I know. I use a laptop.
everdrive 3y ago
I agree that it’s terrible, but you can still meet people in real life. This isn’t really aimed as a refutation your comment, but as pushback to people who are frustrated by these apps. It’s good to get away from them whenever possible.
- lapcat 3y ago
  Society has changed, though. I've seen it during my lifetime. The pandemic certainly changed everything as far as in-person socialization is concerned. But even before the pandemic, people were becoming increasingly isolated and antisocial, and there are a lot of factors at play here. Technology has changed how we interact. Instead of looking around and striking up a conversation with a stranger, they have their heads down looking at their smartphones. And the increasing prevalence of remote work has left fewer opportunities to meet people at work. Sexual mores have also changed. There's a lot more awareness of sexual harassment nowadays, which is good, but it also makes people more reticent to flirt in many situations. That's not a comprehensive list of relevant societal changes, just some factors off the top of my head. The very existence of the dating apps makes them difficult to avoid, because if that's where a significant % of the population are already looking, then you're ruling yourself out from that population by avoiding them.
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    This is a great comment. The world (at least the US) has changed and IRL interactions are more fraught than when I was dating. So glad I'm married and don't have to go back to the scene. Especially your point about the danger of flirting. The difference between flirting (wanted attention) and creeping (unwanted attention) is entirely in the mind of the recipient, so you don't know which one you have done until they respond. I'm sure this causes people to play it cautiously.
    - zo1 3y ago
      I'm married too, with kids. I don't think we can just be okay with it for ourselves, we have to consider what awaits our children when they get to dating age. It's not enough for us to not destroy the world, we have to be custodians of it till we hand it over to the next generation. I'm personally not hopeful. The world is going to shit, and the only option I have available to me to safeguard my kids future is to acquire as much wealth as possible for them. If that doesn't work, that means a giant war or similar catastrophe has descended upon us and there is nothing I could have done anyways.
nextweek2 3y ago
> antitrust law has more or less ceased to exist. I’ve always wondered if this is because of globalisation. If you want your country’s companies to dominate the world market, then a strong home base would help.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
commandlinefan 3y ago
> become monopolized OTOH, like all relatively simple apps, this ought to be trivially easy to create a competitor for, so it must not be economically feasible to do so (just like Facebook, Twitter and Reddit never got any competition no matter how user hostile they became). Why isn't there a free, non-evil Hinge competitor? Because it costs too much to run, and they have to do this to stay in business.
- WorldMaker 3y ago
  The arc of it seems to be that apps either die quickly seeing their best ideas cannibalized by Match Group (and can't compete with its network effects, its dark patterns, its massive budgets) or live long enough to become themselves the villains and eventually copy Match Group's dark patterns or simply just exit into Match Group.
peoplearepeople 3y ago
I think the barrier to making new dating apps is actually rather low, as they tend to spread via word of mouth within small communities. I remember it was always a constant "which app should we be using now" conversation with acquaintances
Mordisquitos 3y ago
> This is truly a nightmare. How did we allow such a crucial human function, finding a mate, to become monopolized? I totally agree with you, and I would go even further. I'm actually furious that an essential part of human social life has become commoditised by a for-profit industry led by publicly-traded corporations. It being almost a monopoly, hidden to "consumers" [0] under an illusion of choice, is only the poop cherry on top of the whole steaming pile of crap. One of my fantasies to become a millionaire (from a starting point of billionaire) is to establish an open source, transparent, non-profit and community-based online platform and app whose only mission is to help people meet someone with whom they are happy to meet and viceversa. Imagine a dating app but: - Nothing encouraging "power users", even discouraging match accumulation. - No gamification, other than configurable by user choice. - No secret algorithms for rating. Instead, a choice of open community-developed algorithms for the swipe queue (if swiping is your thing, you can also filter and sort by query). - No falsifying the potential dating pool size to keep users hooked. Do not show the profile of user A to user B, even if A fits B's filters, if B does not fit A's filters such that A would not see them. - User engagement KPI in the denominator, not the numerator—the numerator being user reported success and personal satisfaction. The less time spent for good results, the better. - No "pay to win". Instead of that, please donate if you win. My dream would be to create a dating(?) platform, nay, a human relationship platform, with no perverse economic incentives that conflict with users matching. I would hope it could be So Damn Good that anyone looking for a date, or a shag, or a FWB, or to meet people to see where it goes, or whatever would feel like a chump to fall for Tinder, Bumble, OkCupid, etc. Let swiping and notification addicts continue to use those for-profit games. Meanwhile, people wanting a human connection could stick to the platform that cares to make it as likely as possible. Unfortunately, the only thing stopping me from doing this is that I have no plan in motion to become a billionaire such that I can finance this idea ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . . [0] No, damnit, searching for a relationship, a fling, a connection, is not an act of consumption, it is an act of basic fucking humanity!
- monort 3y ago
  Why would you need to be a billionaire to build a platform like you described? If you think you can't acquire users without big spending, then this platform is not really much better than existing ones?
captainbland 3y ago
I think it's worth remembering that actually only a minority of people with a partner found that partner through an app/dating site, even among relatively young cohorts. The only thing there is a monopoly over is the digital part but that's strictly optional. https://today.yougov.com/topics/technology/articles-reports/2021/09/22/global-look-who-has-found-love-through-app https://today.yougov.com/topics/technology/articles-reports/...
- lapcat 3y ago
  Here's some more comprehensive data from the US: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/02/key-findings-about-online-dating-in-the-u-s/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/02/key-findi... I'm not arguing that the dating apps are particular good or successful. I wouldn't be complaining about Match Group if they were. In fact, there's been a rising share of people who are unpartnered: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2021/10/05/rising-share-of-u-s-adults-are-living-without-a-spouse-or-partner/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2021/10/05/rising-... In another comment, I talked about societal changes that have resulted in more social isolation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37213625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37213625 I think it's a problem is that we've become increasingly dependent on dating apps. Nonetheless, I don't think "just don't use dating apps" is really a solution, as if they were "strictly optional", because we can't magically go back to the good old days where everyone met their partners in person. The world has changed, and the old world doesn't exist anymore. In many cases, the alternative to avoiding the apps is singleness and loneliness. We might all be better off if we collectively decided to abandon the dating apps. Short of that, however, it's kind of like "unilateral disarmament".
  - captainbland 3y ago
    There's a few things going on here: a lot of young and LGB single people are using the apps but despite that most of those people who do get a partner still aren't actually meeting that partner through an app - about 20% for the youngest age group listed did. This isn't insignificant but 80% of that group did not meet their partner through an app still. While the amount of users of that group are high, most of them are still ultimately going to meet their future partner through other avenues. It's worth highlighting that by definition most of them are unsuccessful at that point. It might be that actually one of the apps' main functions for some people is simply to give people some common ground as they exchange grievances about the experience... On the amount of people in relationships, the data only seems to account for cohabiting and married couples, everyone else seems to be grouped into 'unpartnered'. As such this could also be reflective of changes in living circumstances - more young people still living with parents for example which may reduce opportunities for cohabiting. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/09/04/a-majorit... In any case I agree with you that something is going on there but I still don't think that apps represent a good solution for most people. My personal experience was that online dating was a disaster that (temporarily, fortunately) ruined my self-esteem and my best luck always came when I wasn't 'trying' to date at all.

by lapcat 3y ago

toasted-subs 3y ago

One company who owes all of dating apps which decides almost a third of all relationships means they are responsible for almost every negative thing that happens. The job is also a bit too germanic for me, they are effective causing a holocaust.

water9 3y ago
3 Keys to dating: Workout don’t talk about yourself don’t be reactive.
- pmg102 3y ago
  Maybe don't talk incessantly about yourself. But I think being open about your thoughts, feelings, fears and hopes is attractive. What do you mean by "reactive" here?
jrflowers 3y ago
I am sure that your problem is apps. The impulse to label things you don’t like as holocausts is endearing and sure to attract myriad possible mates

veave 3y ago

You can find a mate without using a smartphone, you know...

lapcat 3y ago
I know. I use a laptop.

everdrive 3y ago

I agree that it’s terrible, but you can still meet people in real life. This isn’t really aimed as a refutation your comment, but as pushback to people who are frustrated by these apps. It’s good to get away from them whenever possible.

lapcat 3y ago
Society has changed, though. I've seen it during my lifetime. The pandemic certainly changed everything as far as in-person socialization is concerned. But even before the pandemic, people were becoming increasingly isolated and antisocial, and there are a lot of factors at play here. Technology has changed how we interact. Instead of looking around and striking up a conversation with a stranger, they have their heads down looking at their smartphones. And the increasing prevalence of remote work has left fewer opportunities to meet people at work. Sexual mores have also changed. There's a lot more awareness of sexual harassment nowadays, which is good, but it also makes people more reticent to flirt in many situations. That's not a comprehensive list of relevant societal changes, just some factors off the top of my head. The very existence of the dating apps makes them difficult to avoid, because if that's where a significant % of the population are already looking, then you're ruling yourself out from that population by avoiding them.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  This is a great comment. The world (at least the US) has changed and IRL interactions are more fraught than when I was dating. So glad I'm married and don't have to go back to the scene. Especially your point about the danger of flirting. The difference between flirting (wanted attention) and creeping (unwanted attention) is entirely in the mind of the recipient, so you don't know which one you have done until they respond. I'm sure this causes people to play it cautiously.
  - zo1 3y ago
    I'm married too, with kids. I don't think we can just be okay with it for ourselves, we have to consider what awaits our children when they get to dating age. It's not enough for us to not destroy the world, we have to be custodians of it till we hand it over to the next generation. I'm personally not hopeful. The world is going to shit, and the only option I have available to me to safeguard my kids future is to acquire as much wealth as possible for them. If that doesn't work, that means a giant war or similar catastrophe has descended upon us and there is nothing I could have done anyways.

nextweek2 3y ago

> antitrust law has more or less ceased to exist. I’ve always wondered if this is because of globalisation. If you want your country’s companies to dominate the world market, then a strong home base would help.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

commandlinefan 3y ago

> become monopolized OTOH, like all relatively simple apps, this ought to be trivially easy to create a competitor for, so it must not be economically feasible to do so (just like Facebook, Twitter and Reddit never got any competition no matter how user hostile they became). Why isn't there a free, non-evil Hinge competitor? Because it costs too much to run, and they have to do this to stay in business.

WorldMaker 3y ago
The arc of it seems to be that apps either die quickly seeing their best ideas cannibalized by Match Group (and can't compete with its network effects, its dark patterns, its massive budgets) or live long enough to become themselves the villains and eventually copy Match Group's dark patterns or simply just exit into Match Group.

peoplearepeople 3y ago

I think the barrier to making new dating apps is actually rather low, as they tend to spread via word of mouth within small communities. I remember it was always a constant "which app should we be using now" conversation with acquaintances

Mordisquitos 3y ago

> This is truly a nightmare. How did we allow such a crucial human function, finding a mate, to become monopolized? I totally agree with you, and I would go even further. I'm actually furious that an essential part of human social life has become commoditised by a for-profit industry led by publicly-traded corporations. It being almost a monopoly, hidden to "consumers" [0] under an illusion of choice, is only the poop cherry on top of the whole steaming pile of crap. One of my fantasies to become a millionaire (from a starting point of billionaire) is to establish an open source, transparent, non-profit and community-based online platform and app whose only mission is to help people meet someone with whom they are happy to meet and viceversa. Imagine a dating app but: - Nothing encouraging "power users", even discouraging match accumulation. - No gamification, other than configurable by user choice. - No secret algorithms for rating. Instead, a choice of open community-developed algorithms for the swipe queue (if swiping is your thing, you can also filter and sort by query). - No falsifying the potential dating pool size to keep users hooked. Do not show the profile of user A to user B, even if A fits B's filters, if B does not fit A's filters such that A would not see them. - User engagement KPI in the denominator, not the numerator—the numerator being user reported success and personal satisfaction. The less time spent for good results, the better. - No "pay to win". Instead of that, please donate if you win. My dream would be to create a dating(?) platform, nay, a human relationship platform, with no perverse economic incentives that conflict with users matching. I would hope it could be So Damn Good that anyone looking for a date, or a shag, or a FWB, or to meet people to see where it goes, or whatever would feel like a chump to fall for Tinder, Bumble, OkCupid, etc. Let swiping and notification addicts continue to use those for-profit games. Meanwhile, people wanting a human connection could stick to the platform that cares to make it as likely as possible. Unfortunately, the only thing stopping me from doing this is that I have no plan in motion to become a billionaire such that I can finance this idea ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . . [0] No, damnit, searching for a relationship, a fling, a connection, is not an act of consumption, it is an act of basic fucking humanity!

monort 3y ago
Why would you need to be a billionaire to build a platform like you described? If you think you can't acquire users without big spending, then this platform is not really much better than existing ones?

captainbland 3y ago

I think it's worth remembering that actually only a minority of people with a partner found that partner through an app/dating site, even among relatively young cohorts. The only thing there is a monopoly over is the digital part but that's strictly optional. https://today.yougov.com/topics/technology/articles-reports/2021/09/22/global-look-who-has-found-love-through-app https://today.yougov.com/topics/technology/articles-reports/...

lapcat 3y ago
Here's some more comprehensive data from the US: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/02/key-findings-about-online-dating-in-the-u-s/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/02/key-findi... I'm not arguing that the dating apps are particular good or successful. I wouldn't be complaining about Match Group if they were. In fact, there's been a rising share of people who are unpartnered: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2021/10/05/rising-share-of-u-s-adults-are-living-without-a-spouse-or-partner/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2021/10/05/rising-... In another comment, I talked about societal changes that have resulted in more social isolation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37213625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37213625 I think it's a problem is that we've become increasingly dependent on dating apps. Nonetheless, I don't think "just don't use dating apps" is really a solution, as if they were "strictly optional", because we can't magically go back to the good old days where everyone met their partners in person. The world has changed, and the old world doesn't exist anymore. In many cases, the alternative to avoiding the apps is singleness and loneliness. We might all be better off if we collectively decided to abandon the dating apps. Short of that, however, it's kind of like "unilateral disarmament".
- captainbland 3y ago
  There's a few things going on here: a lot of young and LGB single people are using the apps but despite that most of those people who do get a partner still aren't actually meeting that partner through an app - about 20% for the youngest age group listed did. This isn't insignificant but 80% of that group did not meet their partner through an app still. While the amount of users of that group are high, most of them are still ultimately going to meet their future partner through other avenues. It's worth highlighting that by definition most of them are unsuccessful at that point. It might be that actually one of the apps' main functions for some people is simply to give people some common ground as they exchange grievances about the experience... On the amount of people in relationships, the data only seems to account for cohabiting and married couples, everyone else seems to be grouped into 'unpartnered'. As such this could also be reflective of changes in living circumstances - more young people still living with parents for example which may reduce opportunities for cohabiting. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/09/04/a-majorit... In any case I agree with you that something is going on there but I still don't think that apps represent a good solution for most people. My personal experience was that online dating was a disaster that (temporarily, fortunately) ruined my self-esteem and my best luck always came when I wasn't 'trying' to date at all.