Thread

1. abeppu · 1790807528 · focus · HN ↗

   So on the one hand it's nice to see when a cool algorithm or framework is used IRL.

   On the other hand, actually applying a 'stable marriage algorithm' to people makes a bunch of assumptions which are worth interrogating:

   - Do people actually know what they want even in the short term?

   - Do people's preference change meaningfully over longer periods of time?

   - Does your preference _upon reading people's profiles_ have any strong relationship to your preference after spending any amount of time with them?

   The property that right after being matched, no one could have matched with someone whose profile they preferred more does not mean that this will create stable relationships.

   1. justonceokay · 1790810616 · focus · HN ↗

      Least they are using an algorithm that has the intended purpose of matching people. For profit dating apps are more interested in keeping you coming back then they are in creating successful relationships

      1. missedthecue · 1790812597 · focus · HN ↗

         This is an extremely common sentiment I see online - that there is some conspiracy to keep people single to reduce subscription churn. I have run two dating apps (my own apps, not working for a company), and what I found through trial and error was that no matter how many levers you pull and tweaks you make, a lot of it is simply user-behavior problems, not a tech or product design problem. There is no reliable way for a dating app to only serve users non-committal matches for example. The reason someone's matches aren't committal is because they don't want to commit.

         The thought experiment I usually pose is to ask what you think a free, open source, and community supported dating app would change. The answer is "not much".

         1. [deleted] · 1790816752 · focus · HN ↗

            [deleted]

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.