3 ms·

These topics somehow always attract some really strange people (usually with dunning-kruger) who seem to think our deeply complex messy world functions exactly

These topics somehow always attract some really strange people (usually with dunning-kruger) who seem to think our deeply complex messy world functions exactly like a board game or that their ideas are somehow original. Go and touch grass.

BobaFloutist 5mo ago
That seems unnecessarily harsh.
- hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
  >1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. Higher quality people have higher standards, it never gets easier because you are always competing within your own dating pool. Celebrities basically date only other celebrities and still have to compete (and sometimes cheat) with other celebrities. The game is always the same, just different players. There is no variable you can change that somehow 'solves' dating. This is not a simple board game. >2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. There is little to no signal that someone is "capable of having a good relationship" through a digital curated profile. Even someone who has been on the app a long time can just be unlucky or more selective. >On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup. This is not at all an original idea. You can also set your dating intentions to "short term" on any dating app. It makes no difference. In fact, even women only interested in this like to pretend to be prude for their self-image. It also won't change the asymmetry issue between men and women due to risks involved for women that makes them far more selective.

BobaFloutist 5mo ago

That seems unnecessarily harsh.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
>1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. Higher quality people have higher standards, it never gets easier because you are always competing within your own dating pool. Celebrities basically date only other celebrities and still have to compete (and sometimes cheat) with other celebrities. The game is always the same, just different players. There is no variable you can change that somehow 'solves' dating. This is not a simple board game. >2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. There is little to no signal that someone is "capable of having a good relationship" through a digital curated profile. Even someone who has been on the app a long time can just be unlucky or more selective. >On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup. This is not at all an original idea. You can also set your dating intentions to "short term" on any dating app. It makes no difference. In fact, even women only interested in this like to pretend to be prude for their self-image. It also won't change the asymmetry issue between men and women due to risks involved for women that makes them far more selective.