Online Dating

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Context & overall reaction

  • Many find the piece interesting but see it as an “engineer mindset” applied to a messy social problem, with a fixation on systems (CRM, scoring, filters) that risks dehumanizing people.
  • Several readers perceive “incel”/misogynistic undertones (e.g., “body count,” hypergamy framing, talk of “reducing competition” via high male fees).
  • Others defend the author as simply frustrated and analytical, not uniquely authoritative on dating.

How online dating differs from offline

  • One camp: apps largely expose existing dating inequalities; top 20% (or fewer) of men get the bulk of attention, average men struggle, women experience apparent abundance but little commitment.
  • Counter-camp: offline dating is different because pools are small and finite, expectations are calibrated, and people commit to “good enough” matches instead of endlessly optimizing.
  • Paradox of choice and “infinite” swipe pools are repeatedly blamed for dissatisfaction and churn.

Market design, incentives, and business models

  • Strong criticism that for‑profit apps are incentivized to keep users single and frustrated (shadow‑banning, boosts, super‑likes, opaque algorithms).
  • Reports from someone who worked at a large dating company: huge scam/bot problem (especially “female” profiles), high‑risk payments, and dominance of a few big mobile apps.
  • Suggestions: seasonal apps to avoid “reverse network effects,” limits on daily profiles, co‑op or federated/nonprofit platforms, or state‑run systems focused on equity.

Gender dynamics and norms

  • Repeated claims of skewed ratios (many more men than women) and women’s ability to be choosy; men report feeling like “beggars.”
  • Others push back, noting average men can and do succeed, and that many complaints are suffused with misogyny and lack of self‑reflection.
  • Debate over what “attractiveness” really is: looks vs effort, personality, text skills, and profile “marketing.”

Strategies, experiences, and “hacking” dating

  • Some men describe “numbers game” tactics (thousands of approaches or heavy profile optimization) leading to eventual success.
  • Others find online dating mostly yields casual/short‑term encounters; long‑term partners were met via friends, work, or hobbies.
  • Several emphasize self‑development, confidence, and offline interaction as more reliable than trying to engineer a perfect app.