In general I like the idea of a dating service. However, most existing implementations do nothing but harm. That's because their business strategy is based on getting money from lonely people, so making more lonely people is the best way to get more money.

@deleuze how do they make more lonely people

I think it's likely YES will win just because the earlier responses are biased towards people who regularly check Manifold.

I'm not sure how any good has come out of dating apps.

Other than the fact that nobody ever talks to anyone in person anymore, the apps have led to an explosion of scams, where AI-generated profiles convince people to send bitcoins to them.

There are actually groups that buy lists of people from legitimate marketing agencies, where the lists have the birthdates of the people. These go into a database, and the day the people turn 65, the AIs start pumping out requests to target the elderly. They actually have specific code that uses that specific age as a cutoff.

It's impossible that whatever good came out of online dating outweighs the catastrophic losses caused by these scams. And, the government simply doesn't care about them - you can report $3m scams to the FBI, and they won't even reply to your contact request.

@SteveSokolowski I think that dating apps exis(or, at least are somewhat popular) t because nobody talks in person anymore, not the other way around. Most people I don't talk to don't use dating apps but are still very unsociable.

@ProjectVictory That's a good point. I think that phones have contributed to that - look at how many people go to restaurants and wait for their meal while everyone of them is using their phones, ignoring each other.

Imagine what's going to happen in two or three years once everyone is wearing AR headsets and glasses all the time. It's already happening just this weekend with the Apple Vision Pro in subways and restaurants.

@SteveSokolowski in my experience, scambots aren't that common, and they're easy to ignore anyway.

@BenjaminIkuta I disagree with that statement. For me or you, they might be, but not all people find these bots easy to ignore. In particular, there are some people who are so lonely or who want sex so badly that they are willing to take a chance and throw money at the problem.

Some of these people completely understand how prevalent scams are. For those people, even if the odds are 1% it's not a scam, they still feel that it's a good use of their money.

@SteveSokolowski dumb people will always be taken advantage of, apps or not. You think scams didn't happen in the days of mail order brides?

There's so much to criticize about how the sexual marketplace has changed in recent decades, the bots are the least of my worries.

@SteveSokolowski I would not be so hasty to state that it is Impossible for any bad effect to be negated.

Perhaps dating sites have averted a tremendous deal of domestic violence, or emotional trauma?

Having said that I voted more harm, because it seems pretty clear to me that The profit motive for dating sites consistently drives them to gamify and micro transact lonely singledom (they earn no money from producing happy couples) so even if they start out with good intentions they will always sell out or go out of business.

@SteveSokolowski It's going to be an exciting time to live through that's for sure;
My long running prediction has been that some subset of the population will just fall away; disappear from view and cease to participate in the "real world", but since (I predict) this will not be the entire population, even if it is a devastating blow to human society, the remainder of the population will recover from it.

All of this becomes irrelevant if some other, faster and more catastrophic, event wipes out our civilization first of course.

@JosefMitchell people saying they met their partner on the app is incredibly powerful marketing.

@BenjaminIkuta Yes, anecdotes sell.
However, do we have statistics of performance of all dating apps and the 5, 10 & 25 year relationship outcomes compared to the venues of matchmaking that they outcompeted?

@JosefMitchell well, that's another question. I'm just disputing the claim that the apps have no incentive to make good matches.

@BenjaminIkuta But I don't think that most people using these apps are trying to find a long-term partner, which is why I always questioned the effectiveness of those ads saying that people were getting married after having met on match.com.

@SteveSokolowski It's actually fairly common:

@BenjaminIkuta It's common that people find long-term partners, but I don't think many people go to the apps for that purpoose.

I also think that confounding factors are driving this chart. In particular, the Me Too! movement makes men unwilling to express interest when they don't have the defense of being able to say that the woman was looking too. I think that many women who complain about not being able to find "good men" dramatically underestimate how much the movement has impacted this area of life.

@SteveSokolowski the Bitcoin scam example is so random 💀 first of all, how many people on Tinder actually own Bitcoin, and second of all, why the f*ck are they sending it to randos they're talking to online?? That's insane. Like beyond down bad. This just sounds so oddly personal that I'm worried you're the one who's lost his Bitcoin to a catfish baddie 😭

On the "no one talks in person anymore," I'm also like what are you talking about? In a dating context, many people initiate contact on an app and then go hang out and talk in person if they're feeling the vibe. People also talk at bars still and just in general, to coworkers and friends and people in public spaces.

Also blaming #MeToo for what? Apps no longer being viable? Once again, no. Apps are more viable now than they were in 2017 and have only grown. These apps literally ensure both parties have interest in the other before pushing contact initiation, so how can we say that men are uncertain the woman is interested? And even if contact could be initiated by just one party's interest, there's a huge difference between a "hey, how are you?" and a crotch shot. One would be considered sexual harassment and the other is just a nice conversation starter. There's zero way a man could face repercussion for sending "hey, what's up?"

@Will94fc This is a false statement.

You can read above that I blamed the Me Too! movement for pushing people to apps, not the other way around. Specifically, I stated: "when they don't have the defense of being able to say the women was looking too."

Words are important; please read what I say carefully.

@SteveSokolowski

In particular, the Me Too! movement makes men unwilling to express interest when they don't have the defense of being able to say that the woman was looking too.

Bruuulh

@SteveSokolowski I don't even know where to start with a sentence like this. So I guess I'll just cut to the chase:

#MeToo has had exactly zero impact on the possibility of men expressing interest in women. It only affects the possibility of men being creepy assholes to women. But apparently you can't tell the difference. I suggest you talk to women to learn about that.

@BrunoParga good thing there's never any uncertainty about being creepy!

@SteveSokolowski I now understand that you were trying to get at a different point with that single line I addressed, and that's why I added a question mark when I asked what you were alluding to #MeToo for. Thanks for clarifying that the intention was moreso an analytical hypothesis! It's an interesting take. However, I also agree with @BrunoParga when he says there's been very little change in how the average man approaches flirting with women. I think it speaks more to just our lives shifting to virtual spaces. Reading the specific excerpt Bruno posted, it sounded like your point was that men being scared to be creeps is preventing women from finding suitable partners, and I think this is a misunderstanding of what is happening. #MeToo was an exposure of outright sexual harassment by people in power, not "an ugly guy at the bar hit on me and I didn't like it." It's about men learning when to stop and what context is appropriate for flirting. I think we can agree that dating apps are more conducive to mutual consent, but I think why I'm bristling at much of what you say is because it has the echoes a lot of stereotypical "incel" talking points and language (inb4 you say this wasn't your intent. Once again, just a vibe, not a diagnosis). At this point, I'm more curious with the root of your pessimism than I am in any mood to counter arguments. Speak your mind, bestie

@BenjaminIkuta for men who actually speak with the women in their lives - their partners, mothers, sisters, daughters, friends, coworkers, members of shared social groups - and who actually listen to prominent women in society - actors, musicians, politicians, athletes, comedians, doctors, professors, religious leaders - there is indeed very little uncertainty, and that measure that exists is never of such a scale that it outright prevents them from expressing their interest in women.

Hello. I'm endorsing this statement that gpt4 wrote for me after discussing the thread:

I believe that Will and Bruno make excellent points regarding the world of most neurotypical individuals and the policy society should have towards individual behavior. I also think that SteveSokolowski is attempting to express a perspective that is often misunderstood due to a kind of cognitive language barrier. In order to maintain our space as a place for constructive and respectful dialogue, I would prefer that no more comments be posted on this thread. I find that discussing in this manner can be embarrassing for our subculture and I wish for us to focus on ways of communicating that promote understanding and empathy among us all.

Thanks for participating in the poll!

@singer sorry bestie. I'm going to continue, but in the spirit of your wish. What you've expressed was something in the back of my head the entire time, and I wish it'd been brought up sooner. Thank you for doing so. I have empathy for what I can only really describe as a lost sense for some neurodivergent individuals when it comes to interpreting and analysing behavior, and I do think that's what is getting lost in the mix here. I think we're trying to fit this gigantic conversation about sexuality, norms, gender, technology, and neurodivergence into a small debate over whether dating apps are good or bad, but that question can't be answered without unraveling all of those facets. Thank you @SteveSokolowski for sharing your perspective, beginning to unravel one of those threads, and continuing to answer on behalf of your thoughts when questioned ❤️ It's given me a lot to think about today

@Will94fc I'm going to ignore the people above who are saying to talk to sisters and mothers and family because that's clearly irrelevant here.

There was a quote I heard once that I thought was interesting: "the difference between a charming advance and a sexual harassment is whether the woman thinks it is sexual harassment."

The quote might go a bit overboard, and it obviously doesn't apply to odious behavior like rape, but it is still true at its core. Two men can say the exact same thing to a woman, and it's possible that one case is viewed as "bold" and the other as "harassment."

In 2019, when I served on the Penn State fraternity trial jury, there was another criminal case that came up before it. There was a man who had approached a woman at work and then continued to pursue her outside of the office for a few weeks after that, showing up at places where she was. There was no physical violence. The guy didn't seem to understand the law very well and decided to represent himself, using no challenges and allowing a jury of twelve women to be selected. He presented no defense. A verdict was reached in 10 minutes and I seem to recall he spent a weekend in jail or something.

In a case like that, I could easily have seen a different man who was better looking and well-spoken who won the woman over with his persistence.

And, this was a criminal trial, not a civil trial where someone with a lot of money could be sued for harassment where a judge felt that a "preponderance of the evidence" fell in favor of the woman being more credible in a two-witness case. So I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I at least have not, and would never, approach a woman I know in a professional work setting due to the current environment - and I have rejected women when the opposite occurred in that context.

And I'm not stupid enough to think I am the only person who feels this way, which is why I believe apps have become such a valuable tool.