Thread

Singapore govt dating app uses Gale-Shapley stable marriage algorithm

466 points · 499 comments · rzk

ValentineC · 1790811622 · focus · HN ↗
The pilot targeting only government workers reminds me a lot of Lee Kuan Yew's various eugenics policies:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#In_Singapore" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#In_Singapore
It certainly doesn't help that the app conveniently targets those between 21 to 35 years of age, which is just before advanced maternal age (also the age where single Singaporeans qualify for public housing).
1. jojobas · 1790815110 · focus · HN ↗
  Positive eugenics never stopped and there's nothing wrong about it. Also there's nothing wrong with the government promoting the creation of stable families with children born before DS risk exceeds 1/100.
  1. s1artibartfast · 1790817063 · focus · HN ↗
    I mean, it sucks if you're a taxpayer over 35 that wants to use the service, especially considering that DS is easy to screen for using modern tests of a mother's blood and Singapore has a reasonable abortion policy
    jojobas · 1790818603 · focus · HN ↗
    Well that's not really different from any other age-limited policy where the govt sees the biggest bang for the buck, like state-funded uni under 35, dental for kids etc.
    s1artibartfast · 1790821655 · focus · HN ↗
    Seems pretty different. What is the incremental cost for additional users? I assume it aproximates to zero in this case.
    jojobas · 1790832123 · focus · HN ↗
    Maybe they estimated the consequences of many 35+ getting married as negative, who knows. Maybe they just wanted better outcomes of the pilot to push on.
2. Der_Einzige · 1790817753 · focus · HN ↗
  [dead]
  1. vigilantpuma · 1790819381 · focus · HN ↗
    Have you really convinced yourself this is an actual standard of a significant proportion of women, even liberal women?
    Eueudhsbsj32 · 1790838151 · focus · HN ↗
    For casual dating, I would say yes, and not just white liberal women.
    As a man who happens to meet those criteria, and has participated in a few hundred hookups over the last 10 years, I'd say a significant portion of the women either directly or indirectly try to discern answers to those questions before meeting or agreeing to casual sex.
    vigilantpuma · 1790873057 · focus · HN ↗
    It sounds like you are an atypical man (even 100 lifetime partners is 99th percentile and you’re claiming more than that in the last 10 years) engaging with a minority subset of women (those who engage in casual hookups). I don’t know that I would make extrapolations from that to the general population of women. As for the guy I was responding to, I think there are far more obvious reasons why someone obsessed with this “666” idea and using acronyms like AWFUL to describe women can’t get a relationship or even a date.
  2. vuurmot · 1790833511 · focus · HN ↗
    well in this case, the woman would have to be sufficient, or they would only degrade the eugenic project
3. jhanschoo · 1790825755 · focus · HN ↗
  The aesthetics of it are definitely the case, but I don't see what else you would choose for a seed group for a project by government services.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.