Of course, a lack of a match is not the only thing that prevents people from having kids, but I'm curious what the impact of an optimal matching service would be on fertility rates.
edit: I think governments might do well to provide funding for dating apps (whether privately or publicly owned) based on how many matches from the app actually lead to children. Completely flip the classical incentives on their head. Should be easy enough to ask if newborns were a product of a participating app as part of the birth certification process.
Fertility is going to 0 and that's a good thing, we need a fresh slate.
Keep supply of women high because men will pay anything for a chance?
I am very curious how this will be changed in this government platform. Maybe it won't LOL
On the other side you got a fresh supply on both sides from kids growing up to be adults and from adults divorcing and even if your matchmaking is perfect and divorce culturally shamed against, people still die which leaves widow(er)s behind, of whom a certain amount will want a new relationship.
The important distinction here is no one is forced to marry anyone. This is entirely optional.
Desperation is from government, because many people just checked out. There are many nicer activities, such as hiking.
> unbiased and impartial judge and coach.
Gov has super strong biases, just the way they punish (or not punish at all) different groups, for the same crime.
> forced to marry anyone.
In every practical way you will be forced to marry. Common law marriage, alimony...
They got your birth record, your education records, your bank account details, your employment record. They can write themselves a warrant to dig through your life. The government already knows all this.
>chooses a mate for you.
You're not forced to marry whoever you match with in the app.
>This is beyond incentives, it is just perverse!
ok this is just slop
This is wrong. Stable matches still mean something, and in fact probably mean quite a lot.
You are given a much better match than a random pairing. If you still aren't interested, you can decline. If you go on a date and it doesn't work out, you can decline.
Nothing forces you to use this process, it is just an offer of a significantly better than random matching to what you might prefer.
It doesn't even need to account for preferences not covered by the questionnaire.
I've never heard this discussed or mentioned as a drawback because it's Nobel Prize winning and "stable" is a shorthand for "fair". Even though there's many unique stable matches that each offer participants different utilities even if individual participants don't have incentives to change their pairing.
In practice, the more powerful party seems to be the proposing side, e.g. hospitals are the "proposing side" when using Gale-Shapeley to match w/ med school students and get their ideal students.
I wonder if anyone who works on dating apps knows if men or women are the preferred side? And is there any research on stable matching that ensures equity (or ideally arbitrary distribution of utility) between the two groups in their stable matches?
You've never seen this discussed as a drawback? I've seen it mentioned quite a bit. For instance, it came up on the last big thread on this just the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49915825
But this isn't raw Gale-Shapley-- the participants aren't ranking all hundreds/thousands of others. In particular, the preference matrix is based on identical mutual compatibility scores, so there's a unique stable solution (not multiple stable ones!), and there's no "side" that benefits, since the solution is identical no matter who does the "proposing".
Is that modeling the problem correctly? It seems pretty rare for two partners to have equal amounts of love for each other.
If I have 10/10 love for Halle Berry, and she has 4/10 love for my Jeff-Bezos-looking ass, it's the 4/10 that's going to dictate whether we live happily ever after. So our mutual compatibility is probably well below 10/10.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_of_stable_matchings
The problem is it's a lattice and not fully ordered. There are cases where there are two or more pairings that are worse for women and better for men, but we cannot determine which pairing is superior to the other overall.
But if it helps likeminded people to find each other, then it absolutely has some value.
Singapore govt dating app uses Gale-Shapley stable marriage algorithm
You can then still apply your usual filters afterwards, such as smell, looks, vibes.
These are well defined criteria which can be queried upon.
However the ranking only works if both sides are honest.
That's the actual problem, though (a lack of it)! Above all else, you'll probably overlook a lot and still commit long-term to someone you can trust.
especially for country like korea and japan ???? Yeah bro they need it
I don't understand your question.