40 pointsby 01-_-a day ago15 comments
  • haswella day ago
    I found myself single in my late 30s after a long relationship ended.

    Dipping my toe in the water with the apps was not an experience that I enjoyed. I met my ex online at a time when people didn’t admit they met online. That was a far better time for online dating.

    What I know with absolute certainty is that adding AI to the pre-meeting process is exactly the opposite of what I want, especially if that means I’m not interacting with the real person.

    I already have a strongly stated “if we’re both interested based on our profiles, let’s just meet for coffee ASAP” preference, and the best dates have been with people who felt the same way. Anything else (aside from maybe a video call) just means we’re both building images of each other that may not be real. People are very different in person in many cases. Add an AI in the middle, and this is even worse.

    I wholly agree with the point that adding an AI layer is just taking an already suboptimal situation and making it immediately worse.

    I can’t help but feel like this is a market ripe for disruption. If the big apps start featuring AI, I think this becomes even more true.

    • ehsankia20 hours ago
      I was almost exactly in the same situation as you. In my 20s, I remember using OKCupid, but the OKCupid I found when I tried again in my 30s was very different (it is owned by Match afterall). All the apps were very similar, and the only chance I had of actually getting anywhere was sinking a ton of money into them. I was heavily active on 3-4 apps and vaguely active of 3-4 others, for nearly a year. I think I sunk ~$500 into the apps, with maybe 2 dozen dates to show of it.

      Part of the problem is the abundance of profiles. We get trained to judge people on a very superficial level, because there's just too many people to properly analyze. I found myself going through phases of trying to swipe everyone right, and then through phases of being a lot more picky and swiping left of anyone that had the smallest flaw.

      You're right that at the end of the day, the best way was to meet people IRL asap and get to know them that way. That being said, for busy full time adults, that's still a lot of work and effort.

      Dating I find is especially hard for people who don't have third spaces. For introverts hanging out online. You can have third spaces online (twitch, discord, gaming communities), but it's harder to find local people there.

    • onemoresoopa day ago
      Couldn’t agree more. AI is an extra layer of indirection and distorted expectations that are not needed in dating apps. Imagine a world where AI agents that deal with other AI agents deciding what’s good for you. What could go bad?
    • tmpz22a day ago
      I actually met some of the people building these types of company, they completely blank when you bring up ethical concerns and unintended consequences. I'd love a townhall event with one of them just so the world could see the type of men behind these dating apps.
      • ryandrake21 hours ago
        To be fair, a lot of professional programmers (regardless of application / industry) completely blank when you bring up ethical concerns of their work. As long as they're being paid and it's an [interesting | challenging | hot] technology, they're more than happy to turn a blind eye toward the application they're actually building. "Hey, I'm just moving protobufs around, it's not my fault my company uses it to build the Torment Nexus!"
    • apwell23a day ago
      late 30s is the prime dating market for men when scales tip towards their favor. enjoy!!
      • 20 hours ago
        undefined
  • redeuxa day ago
    This is not the future we need. Humans need real emotional connection. Hell, it’s right in the middle of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and fundamental to both self-esteem and self-actualization[0].

    In order to develop true friendship, whether plutonic or romanic, there has to be a base of authenticity. Otherwise the relationship is built on deceit and will eventually erode. Obviously inserting an AI between you and a potential friend or parter is not in line with building the foundation of a healthy relationship.

    [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

    • cardanomea day ago
      I don't disagree with your main point but you really overstate Maslow’s hierarchy quite a bit.

      It is a framework to start thinking about how needs can be prioritized but is does not necessary reflect the actual hierarchy of needs of individuals which is very culturally, economically and well individually dependent. People are naturally different and have different needs. Humans are way too complex for such a simple pyramid to provide accurate answers.

    • maratca day ago
      But maybe if both sides are using AI bots, then the two bots fall on the same level of authenticity, and then it's not a problem.

      I have a feeling that shortly it's gonna be all robots talking to robots.

      • maxdoopa day ago
        Black mirror episode about exactly this
    • kelseyfrog21 hours ago
      We have the power to construct systems where this is disincentivized.

      However, no one seems to believe that's possible despite being the ones that built the systems in the first place. It seems we're only able to build social systems by accident which incidentally is the worst way of doing it.

    • Aurornisa day ago
      > Otherwise the relationship is built on deceit and will eventually erode.

      From watching friends use dating apps and go on dates: People with misleading profiles don't get very far. The lies get spotted quickly, often on the first date.

      The people who play these games seem to be hoping that the other person will look past it, or that they can charm their way around it if they could just lie their way to the first encounter.

      For 100% of my friends, it's a dealbreaker when they discover someone has been lying.

      This isn't limited to text. The most common one is when people use photos from 5-10 years ago. I've heard so many stories of people arriving to first dates and barely recognizing the person because they're a decade older or significantly less physically fit. At this point it's almost like they're pleasantly surprised when the person they meet looks like their profile pictures.

    • JasserInicidea day ago
      It's not the future we need but it's the one we deserve. This place is heavily complicit in the popularity of AI. It creams its pants any time a new LLM is announced.
  • kylecazara day ago
    "may degrade an already precarious online environment"

    Not may, will.

    Furthermore, I will never wrap my head around why people would use AI for a use-case like this. It entirely defeats the purpose of interacting with people. If you are awkward, with enough time you will either find someone who is also awkward, or someone who doesn't care/finds it endearing.

    Having a bot generate dialog for you is a weird step backward.

    • awongha day ago
      The bot is just a symptom of the weird social dynamics at play inside a dating app, where in a heterosexual environment, the women recieve an unmanageable number of messages and the men need to send/respond to an unmanageable number of messages in order for both parties to agree to meet up in real life.

      Everyone agrees that most of the point of a dating app should be to figure out if real-life interaction is pleasant and agreeable, but for lots of reasons it's difficult to get to that point.

    • cardanomea day ago
      The way people select a mate on dating apps is very different than how people judge potential mates when meeting them in real life.

      Someone could be bad at texting and writing profiles but actually charming and a good fit to you when given the chance to have an actual date.

      The idea so use a tool that helps you over the initial hurdle so you get a chance in the first place isn't that far fetched. Also speaking personally, I dislike texting and find dating apps a huge time waster, so automating the process sounds like a good idea.

      I am not sure AI is the solution but the problem is real.

      • kelseyfrog21 hours ago
        Dating apps commodify meeting people. Any time something is commodified, it undergoes a distortion, first to meet the demands of being a commodity, and then to meet the demands of the market in which it's disseminated.

        AI, if easier and worse, has the potential to accelerate the decline of online dating - already a hellscape - into something so terrible it is easier to avoid. AIAcc is a legitimate stance in the face of this.

        • Dracophoenix5 hours ago
          > Dating apps commodify meeting people.

          Romantic relationship are commodified and transactional in nature. Brideprices and dowries preceded the dating app by millennia. In China, it's not uncommon to see literal marriage markets where parents sell their child's resumes to other parents as though their children were cars or cattle.

    • swatcodera day ago
      You're completely right.

      But people on dating apps are all of: frustrated, desperate, bored, exhausted, insecure, and frivolous, etc

      For many (of all genders), any opportunity to distance themselves from those feelings while still imagining some kind of success is going to be enticing.

    • asaha day ago
      I believe the argument is that tools/bots can help a person's self confidence.

      This argument breaks down when the other side is using a bot to respond, which of course they are.

    • pinkoa day ago
      > I will never wrap my head around why people would use AI for a use-case like this

      If your sociopathic goal is solely to trick someone into an in-person date at which they might be too socially insecure (or too desperate for companionship) to decline sex, then it's a win for the person faking themselves.

      This is definitely a sign that online dating apps as a whole are circling the drain, though.

    • lazidea day ago
      Dating apps were never legitimate interaction anyway.
    • 01-_-a day ago
      I agree
    • mrshadowgoosea day ago
      Depends on one's goals. If simply hooking up is the objective, although it's disingenuous/dishonest, this would improve one's odds.
  • satvikpendema day ago
    I read a short story once, maybe by Ted Chiang of Stories of Your Life fame which inspired Arrival, it talked about how there was a similar system for dating in their world, bots writing for other bots, that eventually the AI got so powerful that it knew who your soulmate was out of everyone in the world and it would tell you.

    What the people in the story grappled with was, would you truly want to meet your supposed soulmate or would you want to exercise your free will to find them yourself, even if perhaps that were a suboptimal process?

    Edit: the story was The Perfect Match by Ken Liu [0]

    [0] https://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/fiction/the-perfect-match...

    • lucianbra day ago
      I don't know. If my doctor tells me I need to take a certain pill to get better when I am sick, I don't grapple with the lack of free will. I really don't want to take my chances by choosing medications myself. What would be the point of that? Especially in the hypothetical situation where the doctor is perfect, or nearly so.

      This feels more like cope than anything. We are stuck in an imperfect situation and tell ourselves it's better this way.

      • satvikpendem4 hours ago
        Taking medicine is vastly different than finding love, for most people (even if many do in fact refuse a doctor's orders to exercise their free will too, to their detriment). In fact, for examples of the latter, there are many stories in media about characters going against the grain of what their society expects of them simply so that they can experience their own free will, just as the story I linked.

        The "point, " so to speak, in the context of relationships, is that people do prefer to have a suboptimal choice if they can feel like they are the ones that made it. You should read the story that I linked that delves more into this.

      • sofixa21 hours ago
        > If my doctor tells me I need to take a certain pill to get better when I am sick, I don't grapple with the lack of free will. I really don't want to take my chances by choosing medications myself. What would be the point of that? Especially in the hypothetical situation where the doctor is perfect, or nearly so.

        Unfortunately (in the vast majority of cases), a lot of people do. They "do their own research" and go with healing cristals/essential oils, or choose a treatment "compatible with their religion" or some other nonsense. What you're describing is rational (delegating decision making in certain spheres, within reason, to educated people in those spheres), but a lot of people aren't.

    • im3w1la day ago
      Batch ten predicted couples and put them all in a speed dating event so they can have the illusion of picking each other.
  • smusamashaha day ago
    This is a low tech replication of black mirror episode where a guy and girl fell in love with each other after first date. Realised something is wrong with the world and tried to exit the simulation. In the real world, those two were decided by AI as a match because these two passed the challenge together in simulation.
  • Carroka day ago
    So happy I’m married already. Dating today seems like such a nightmare and this will only make it worse.
    • Oarcha day ago
      It's very brute force. The apps often ignore filters you've set - even those you've paid for access to!

      It's partly just a feeling but I can sometimes feel changes in the algorithm and they're never for the better, unfortunately.

    • ta12653421a day ago
      Coming out of nearly exactly 12.75 years long-term-relationship and trying currently these apps, i can confirm to you: TRUE.

      I do not know whats up with the people: Couple of weeks ago i had a dad, she had also 2 children; during the discussion it turned out that they have a battle regarding who is responsible for cleaning the bathroom+WC; i was shocked about their frequency (3 people!), so i said: why dont just get a cleaning support? In my language, there is a difference between male and female wording - since its very "common language", i used the "female version" of the cleaning support personel as most people do over here - then i got a punch for how irrespectful and sexist i am for using this wording and why i do not use a "neutral" version.

      • ta12653421a day ago
        why do i get downvoted here on a story that happened in real life?
        • misnomea day ago
          Because the entire statement is exhausting to try and parse - nearly unreadable because you flip the genders back and forth at random. Whatever you were trying to say is completely lost behind it.

          Edit: also I have no idea where you got “get a cleaning support” from, maybe a badly literalised translation for “cleaner”? Otherwise I’m not sure what english gendered term would elicit that reaction, housemaid seems too regular, “french maid” maybe? That might hit the archaic and loaded sexist implications? Otherwise, if not english, then I’m afraid perhaps the situation doesn’t directly translate well.

          • ta1265342121 hours ago
            Its a german speaking country, and compared to your "housemaid" the colloqial saying here on the street is "Putzfrau" or "Putzfee".

            Wording: "get a cleaning support" - you mean, it sounds like i recommend someone to go to drug-cleaning-therapy and lot of people may get it wrong? :-D

        • ceejayoza day ago
          “Why don’t you just get a cleaner?” is not a subject I’d introduce anywhere near the start of a relationship.
          • ta1265342121 hours ago
            Well, if you are telling me about problem X, which could easily resolved and which would be useful and beneficial for you, and we could solve it with low transactions costs, and i present you the solution Y to your problem X: Why should this be offensive? (obviously they have some "logistics alignment problem", if the have those dicussions?)

            example: im living alone and i also hired someone to do this. I do not get whats wrong about a useful suggestion? And esp. in this case, its not about the money that they do not hire someone

            • ceejayoz21 hours ago
              People often make the mistake of thinking “I want to rant about X” means “I’d like a near stranger to tell me how to fix X”.

              “Why don’t you just get someone in to clean”, specifically, may also cause a perception of criticism. Perhaps they want their kids to learn to do the chore for when they live alone. Etc.

              • ta1265342120 hours ago
                OK, i get the idea of that stranger guy in the metro telling you how to fix your life when he saw that you are scrolling whatever self-help-page.

                Well, in this specific case: This wasnt our first date, we met already several times before; so i was not just throwing over this idea as a stranger.

                And i get the educational-track here that you are pointing on - the thing is, if you would know about their frequency (as told by her), then you see that a critical level may be achieved at which you shouldn bet on "if-its-dirty-enough-the-kids-will-do-it-somewhen" ;-) ;-)

        • rfreya day ago
          From me because you turned a thread about online dating into a missive that reads "woke feminists today, amirite?"
          • ta1265342121 hours ago
            Well, if this is your only worries, then, yes, you are right: Im a very-bad-Super-Nazi (or even more!) when just telling that i was wondered about getting offended because of using the regular "local language"

            LOL :-)

            • rfrey16 hours ago
              Why did you ask if you didn't want to know?
  • cs702a day ago
    Mass-market online dating apps are already a minefield of phony/fake and spammy/scammy content.

    AI will make it so much worse, so quickly.

    I wonder if this will spark a return to more old-fashioned methods for finding dates.

    • shalga day ago
      Probably will slightly increase old fashioned methods. More likely though it’s going to accelerate social isolation :/
      • ta12653421a day ago
        Here i can also add a story:

        Last year, i recognized a lady who also exits the same metro & bus at the same station sometimes, so i was looking forward that i will see her again one day. This happened: I have to note im somewhat above the average body height, as she is: id say she was around 1.89m, my own size - apart from the fact that i found her beautiful, i thought it would be somehow a "higher chance" to get to known her, since for tall women its actually not easy (if you are ~1.89m and you want someone who is at least the same size, 90%+ men are out!) and i "projected" that she may notice this. So when i saw her leaving the bus, i spoke to her and invited here to a coffee - she looked at me completely confused like i was trying to rob her. (it was a "daylight situation" short after lunch)

        Not required to say that she never called back after handing her my number :-)))

        • MandieDa day ago
          Um, did you consider that this tall, beautiful woman might a) already have a partner despite being tall, b) not be interested in finding a partner right now, or c) since it was lunchtime, was thinking about something she needed to do for work and resented the interruption?
          • ungreased067521 hours ago
            What would you recommend he have done instead?

            Your reaction is an example of why dating is so hard for guys. There is no way to approach women without risking a potentially reputation-ruining reaction.

            • dragonwriter21 hours ago
              Well, there's definitely no right way to do a cold approach and immediate invitation to a date to a stranger on the street; there are contexts where people are signalling they are open to dating approahces from strangers (dating apps, certain singles events—but even a certain amount of mutual sharing, facilitated by the app or event, is normal before an invitation, for both parties to do some assessment of compatibility beyond appearance), and there are relatively safe ways and contexts to inquire about the possibility of a date where there is a pre-existing non-dating relationship. But a cold approach on the street based on nothing but appearance (partially attraction, partially the paradoxical assessment that this attractive potential partner has an unusually limited set of potential partners of their own) has got to be the worst choice ever.

              Not only do you have a mich higher chance of approaching someone who isn't available for dating in any context, you also signal that your only concern in dating in appearance and that you are incredibly socially inept and unaware of the contexts in which dating approaches are appropriate, neither of which are helpful to your cause, in most cases.

              • ta1265342120 hours ago
                >>you also signal that your only concern in dating in appearance

                a) first, i didnt tell her my assumption?!!!

                b) you are sounding like: "do not do any of those assumptions because they are wrong and listen..." - in fact: EVERYBODY is doing those assumptions/calculations when approaching someone, regardless the environment - so there is absolutely no reason to point out that my "behaviour" is somehow any specific to someone else - this is just disguise from yours :-)

                c) what about all this buff then: "why does nobody invites me on a date?" and "why do men do not speak to women openly" etc. and all this stuff that we can read everywhere, like: Men have to approch Women, so i did. And failed. And now you have your perspective, thats OK.

                d) WHENEVER you are speaking to someone in a club/socialevent/etc. your primary signal is appearance, so do not try to wrap this otherwise since experiments & data show absolutely whats going on.

                • dragonwriter19 hours ago
                  > a) first, i didnt tell her my assumption?!!!

                  You approached her cold on the street knowing nothing about her but her appearance. You don't need to tell your assumption. Women have brains.

                  > you are sounding like: "do not do any of those assumptions because they are wrong and listen..."

                  While I may have an opinion on the assumptions you are making, I am not at all expressing that. What I am expressing is that you are failing to consider important factors in your calculation, namely, the social context, and the impapct of the social context on the way your actions are perceived by someone doing their own set of calculations.

                  > what about all this buff then: "why does nobody invites me on a date?

                  This is about what happens in social contexts where dating intent is signalled, not in those where it is not.

                  > and "why do men do not speak to women openly"

                  "Speaking" here is not code for "invite on dates", and, again, this still is sensitive to appropriate social contexts.

                  > Men have to approch Women, so i did. And failed.

                  You have confused a broad (though not universal) social expectation that men should be the party to approach women with the concept that it is equally beneficial to do so in any social context and all that matters is that there is a woman you think you might want to date present to make it appropriate. This is...incorrect.

                  You have managed to wrap your brain around (even if you may have overgeneralized it) a single social expectation. Your success may be improved when you increase your capacity for processing social expectations relevant to your task to a quantity greater than one.

                  • ungreased067519 hours ago
                    If a guy sees an attractive woman out in real life somewhere, is there any action he can take that would be appropriate? What specifically should a guy do?
          • ta1265342121 hours ago
            Good catch! The days when i saw her some days in the metro, i checked explicitly if she has some signs of an existing relationship, like a ring or something specific that may indicate this.

            Also i have to admit, she is a smoker; something i could deal with (teethgrindingly) since i was one for myself years ago, but honestly: Today most men wont partner up with a lady who is a smoker. And in case of men today, if you are smoking you are actually out forever for any women: Smoking _is_ just disgusting :-D

            So, my "gut-statistics" is just telling me that she is/was single with a very very high probality.

            EDIT: before someone is coming with clothes or similar ideas: Im working in a decent office environment in which nice clothes are the standard (finance), so im not running around with jeans etc, also im in very good shape

    • luqtasa day ago
      almost all of the popular ones have photo verification and you can limit yourself on interacting with photo-verified (Tinder even have ID auth) users only
      • ta12653421a day ago
        How would you prove in front of court that this verification icon was not placed by the app development company? :-)
        • luqtas13 hours ago
          i'm yet to have a good chat with a bot. never met one in a dating app tho, but you raised a quite neat point... what's the end point? make effective bots that out of the blue unmatches you? if that ever gets out in the wild, either the company risks (i guess) a huge legal fee or users migrate to reliable places/video chatting right after matching turns into a user 'handshake' verification
  • Aurornisa day ago
    It's interesting to see the strong negative reactions to this. I people are reading this and imagining themselves on the receiving end of an AI-enhanced profile or chat.

    Contrast that with the reactions any time there's an article about AI-assisted resume generation or job applications: The sentiment in HN comments (and in many places across the internet) is that using AI to write a resume and apply for jobs should be fair game because it's all a dumb process and companies can't accurately judge resumes anyway. You just need to say the right things to get past the gatekeeper so you can impress them in person (sound familiar?).

    I think the primary difference is whether people think of the AI as helping them, or being used against them (with a layer of anti-corporate angst, of course).

    Regardless, the premise appears to be the same: Use AI to game the system that people use to filter introductions, then hope that you can impress the other party once you're in front of them and talking naturally.

    Personally, I feel like I've seen this fail more than it succeeds. Even before AI it wasn't uncommon for people to use misleading dating app photos or to exaggerate claims on resumes. Once the other party discovers you've been misleading them, they begin to wonder what else you're lying about.

    The best case I can think of for these AI tools is people who struggle to write positively about themselves or who have poor self-awareness about the things they write. I've met a lot of people who are simply bad at writing, especially when it comes to themselves. Having an AI act as an impartial coach could help.

    Using AI as a bot to flirt with people on dating apps through chat (mentioned in the article) just feels like a losing strategy, though, unless your goal is to play a numbers game.

    • drudolph91421 hours ago
      > Contrast that with the reactions any time there's an article about AI-assisted resume generation The sentiment in HN comments (and in many places across the internet) is that using AI to write a resume and apply for jobs should be fair game

      These 2 scenarios don’t have any commonality. You’re comparing how AI is being used in two different types of “social games” that have wildly different stakes. The stakes make this incomparable.

      Dating apps are about fostering human connection. AI posing as a person is the opposite of human connection

      Meanwhile, not having a job for the vast majority people means you can’t eat. The system shouldn’t punish people for using a tool that helps them find work to survive

  • antman22315 hours ago
    I actually got a girlfriend through automation lol. So its actually really funny that we all go through the same problem in online dating especially on apps like Hinge. I tried to search for solutions out there that help with the swiping part so I can focus on getting matches. I literally am a person that likes to live offline and spend less time on these apps and focus more of my time doing productive things. But that being said living in a big city gets lonely and its hard to even socialize after a long day of work so you have to go back to the apps. I started searching for solutions around this same exact problem and theres a website theloveguru.ai which literally does this for Hinge+ users. So I used it, but to be fair it didn't work immediately cause you get a lot of matches and luck wasn't on my side, I was still getting ghosted (maybe my profile sucked), but ultimately on my 800th match in New York I vibed well with my date (now my girlfriend) and I guess it is a numbers game at the end of the day. I personally think AI is taking over a lot of things even in the dating apps industry. Like theres AI photo enhancers already that make you look 10X better and then automation and AI wingmen for messages etc. I kind of view it as a numbers game now but yeah curious to know what ya'lls experience has been.
  • qoeza day ago
    One perspective is that we already have a number of long since normalized 'genetic fitness' obfuscators in the shape of makeup and surgery. It's an arms race but both sides are smart enough to be aware of the fakery and start seeking costly non fakable signals instead.
  • mettamage19 hours ago
    > But those “struggling users” who may be lacking in social skills, and begin to rely on AI assistants to craft conversations for them, may have difficulty once they arrive on real-life dates, without the use of their phone to help them converse. This could lead to anxiety and further retreat into the comfort of the digital space, a group of academics has claimed.

    It may also not for some of them. For me, digital vs IRL is a different experience. My style of communicating is different.

    > It could also erode the trust users have in the authenticity of others on the app. Who is using AI and who is a genuine, flesh-and-blood human tapping away behind the screen?

    This is already a general issue for the whole internet, not just online dating.

    If certain people struggle with social skills, they should get social skills training. Dating coaches exist. They're not cheap but exist.

    > Many single people say that it has never been more difficult to find a loving relationship.

    I agree, my last dating period was 3 years ago. It required a lot more skill than 15 years ago.

    > homogenising profiles

    This is already happening based on my experience. But they do forget though that during the dates the homogeneity goes out of the window by quite a bit. It's only the online part that has this.

    > But proponents of dating app AI say that assistants and “dating wingmen”, as they’re known, could help reduce dating app fatigue

    Not really as the recipient will now be wondering whether an AI is talking to her/him. So the fatigue is transferred.

    > Last year, product manager Aleksandr Zhadan programmed ChatGPT to swipe through and chat to more than 5,000 women on his behalf on Tinder. Eventually, he met the woman who is now his fiancée.

    That worked because it's still a growth hack. Not many people are doing it. The moment that many people are doing it, this probably won't work anymore. I made a simple autoswiper too, swiped through 200K profiles and found my wife that way. I did the chatting on my own because ChatGPT 3.5 couldn't keep up with my playfulness. Also, the chatting for me served as an anchor to start the date off with a blast. I specifically remember when I met my wife on our first date that I was groggy and cranky due to a severe lack of sleep. But when we met, one of us used callback humor from our Tinder conversation and our time with each other has been hype ever since. If I'd had used ChatGPT there, that date may have started off less well since I wouldn't know any of the playful things I'd have mentioned.

  • drivingmenutsa day ago
    I understand the argument in favor of - I suffer from severe social anxiety when it comes to meeting women. But, even as much as I might desire (or even need) a "wimgman", this is not the answer. People need to meet the real you, online or otherwise, else they're going to face major disappointment later on.

    This app isn't helping.

  • deadbabea day ago
    In my experience I’ve found that people can struggle on real life dates regardless of whether they used AI or not. Sending messages back and forth, having minutes or hours to craft a perfect response is far different than having a conversation in person. That smooth talker who said all the right things in text turns out to be nothing more than a fumbling marble mouth in person.

    That’s why if you’re online dating you need to be ready to meet in person right away, otherwise you’re wasting your time. A long conversation is not going to make you any less likely to be killed by a serial killer nor does it weed out guys just looking for sex. If someone looks good and doesn’t open with cringe or creepy lines just meet in a neutral place for coffee or drinks and take it from there, you may be glad you did. Don’t overthink it.

    AI Dating Bots are a lie sold to people who think better messages are the key to success. The truth is your success has always depended on luck, the right match at the right time.

    • jfengela day ago
      That came as a shift for me. In the early aughts I had long online conversations before meeting. I took it as a way to show that I was serious.

      One of those turned into a decade long relationship, and when I returned, the time horizon was much shorter. I think too many women had been jerked around by men who never wanted to meet (perhaps because they were married).

      Things have shifted yet again with the prevalence of bots and scammers. Which is too bad, because it had been an environment that suited me well: getting to know someone in a safe way, and to show them who I was.

    • Arkhadiaa day ago
      I enjoyed reading your thoughts here. I’ve been saying it for years how dating apps capitalize on the same addiction and human traits that casinos do.
  • pndjk19 hours ago
    and we wonder why there's a "loneliness epidemic". Give me a break
  • gedya day ago
    Online "dating" that involves texting is just such a terrible fit.

    Most people either have poor reading comprehension or lack ability to write clearly, and that's the worst combo for relationship building.

    It's really no surprise that "dating" apps devolve into clicking a picture and hooking up for sex.

    • jfengela day ago
      In my experience, women who don't communicate well via text also don't communicate well in person. Dyslexia is a real thing, and there are other challenges, but when I got a bad feeling from her written communication it boded very badly for a date.

      I don't date men, but the women I've dated often say that's their experience as well. Of course, those are women who also matched my communication style, so that may not generalize.

      • gedya day ago
        That’s true, I’ve seen examples of someone jumping to conclusions or taking the worst possible interpretation of a text, which is probably a red flag even in real life, face-to-face communication
    • johnisgooda day ago
      Texting only sure sucks, you need to be on cam and talk through the mic at the very least.
      • ta12653421a day ago
        actually, id say this would kill the business: Most people look on cam much less attractive than in real life, also most people do not like to interact per video immediately (apart from the fact that with todays deepfake-AI tools one could be easily a victim to ID-theft etc.)
        • johnisgood21 hours ago
          I look much better on cam due to filters. :D