Looking for sex without commitment?

Find Hot People Blogs

February 27, 2012

Dating Site Thinks It Knows Better Than You

Filed under: algorithm, date, dating, match, online, site, users — Tags: , , , , , , — admin @ 6:29 pm

By Helen A.S. Popkin

Anyone who’s been set up on a blind date with someone described as “perfect for you!” by a close friend or other sort of amateur matchmaker — only to spend an awkward couple of hours in the sixth through ninth circle of dating hell— will be instantly enraged to hear about the latest gimmick science of Match.com.

“Synapse,” an algorithm project Match.com’s been developing for the past two years, is designed to look past what you say you want in a potential mate, and suggest who you really want, the Financial Times reports:

So, if a woman says she doesn’t want to date anyone older than 26, but often looks at ­profiles of thirty-somethings, Match will know she is in fact open to meeting older men. Synapse also uses “triangulation”. That is, the algorithm looks at the behaviour of similar users and factors in that ­information, too.

It sounds a lot like those personality tests that ask you the same question 30 different ways to trick you into answering truthfully.

Sure, you don’t need an algorithm to know that what people say is very often different from what they do, but the new math seems to be working for Match.com. While it’s unknown how many actual dates Synapse helped orchestrate, users are interacting more with the top 5 date suggestions they’re asked to rate daily, according to the site.

“Secret sauce” is how Nick Paumgarten of the New Yorker described the various exercises and algorithms online dating sites tout to attract hopeful singles to their services. “All these sites they all have an approach that they abide by,” Paumgarten pointed out in an NPR interview about “Looking for Someone,” his July expose on online dating services. “But the approach is also their — sort of their selling point.”

Indeed, some of the dissatisfied Match.com customers called out by the Financial Times piece echo what you might hear on any dating site — be it eHarmony or OKCupid.

“The Match algorithm should have figured out that I don’t want a 45-year-old from New Jersey,” one thirty-something professional woman from Manhattan told the Financial Times. “Every time I log on I feel faintly insulted.”

September 29, 2011

Online Dating Sites Know You Better Than You Know Yourself

Filed under: algorithm, criteria, guys, looking, match, online, profiles, site, woman — Tags: , , , , , , , , — admin @ 2:29 pm

Dating online involves doing awkward stuff like describing your taste in music and explaining what your hypothetical “perfect” match would be like. But when it comes right down to it, what you say you want is not necessarily what will make you happy. And the folks behind Match.com know this.

As David Gelles writes for the Financial Times, Match.com has been working on an “improved matchmaking algorithm.” Mandy Ginsberg, the president of the site, tried JDate when she got out of college but is married to someone she used to work with — and he’s not Jewish. “If I had laid out a criteria for what I was looking for, it would not have been a guy from south India,” she says. “People are complex.” So Match.com uses a complicated algorithm that attempts to “learn” from a user’s habits.

Amarnath Thombre, a engineer at Match.com, explains further: “Before, matches were based on the criteria you set. You meet her criteria, and she meets yours, so you’re a good match… But when we researched the data the whole idea of dissonance came into focus. People were doing something very different from the things they said they wanted on their profile.”

Gelles interviews a woman, Karrah O’Daniel, who in October will marry a man she met online. She was looking for a dude between the ages of 21 and 26; he was 28; she was looking for a guy whose body was “about average” or “athletic and toned”; he described himself as “stocky.” “We didn’t match, but you can’t really sum up a person in a check box,” says O’Daniel. Gelles points out that O’Daniel and her fiancé never really searched for one another at all — the site suggested he check out her profile. “They were introduced by the algorithm.”

For instance: If you claim you’re not interested in older guys but click on the profiles of a bunch of older guys, the algorithm will realize that you’re open to older guys and start suggesting profiles of men above your age limit. The formula is big business: Match.com is owned by digital media group IAC. Last year Match.com and IAC’s other online dating sites generated $401 million. (IAC also owns Chemistry.com and OkCupid.)

The question, of course, is whether or not this algorithm means Match.com is successful. You hear a few romantic tales like Karrah O’Daniel’s, and then there are the other stoires.

“The Match algorithm should have figured out that I don’t want a 45-year-old from New Jersey,” said one frustrated thirty-something professional woman from Manhattan. “Every time I log on I feel faintly insulted.”

Maybe love is the one problem computers can’t solve.

August 20, 2011

Mobile Cupids, or Modern Imps?

Filed under: dating, facebook, match, online, people, person, technology — Tags: , , , , , , — admin @ 4:34 pm

By JP Mangalindan

As a tech writer, I’m impressed by the industry and the rate at which companies innovate. Fifteen years ago streaming high-quality video content was a pipe dream squeezed by the reality of 56K modems; the power of the social graph remained largely untapped a decade ago because mainstream social networks simply didn’t exist to tap it; and as recently as five years ago, the mobile experience hosted by Palms, BlackBerries, and “candy bar” phones only hinted at the fluid, touchscreen-optimized, app-driven experience we take for granted today. Tech pushes us forward on multiple fronts, but there’s one area I’m not sure it’s helped much, and that’s romance.

A good friend — let’s call her “Kathleen” — suggested I check out a TV spot for the 2011 Chevy Cruze that highlights the compact car’s delivery of “real-time updates” to the driver. In the commercial, the car’s owner had instant access to his date’s Facebook Newsfeed, so when she updated her status (“Best first date ever!”), he knew within minutes. Kathleen argued the commercial was heart-sinkingly awful — not because of its premise but the notion that technology, in this case hyper-connectivity, was eroding an element that matters to many of us — the mystery and serendipity that often goes with dating.

While the Cruze ad was schmaltzy, it got me thinking about how big a role technology now plays even in this, um, corporeal aspect of our lives. A good chunk of people still meet significant others the old-fashioned way, but many of us now turn online for help. A recent study conducted by the University of Oxford reports that nearly one in three Internet users have visited an online dating site, while one of the leading online dating services, Match.com, which claims nearly 1.6 million subscribers and raked in $400 million in revenues last year, claims that online dating now accounts for at least one in six marriages and one in five committed relationships.

Wreaking havoc on the discovery process

In some ways Match makes it incredibly easy for users to be choosy — not a bad thing in and of itself — but people are presented like they’re stock photos in a yearbook, with pages upon pages of faces that make it incredibly easy for daters to treat them less like human beings and more like easy commodities. Many – myself included – may need the opportunity to highlight our personalities beyond a small pic and one or two initially viewable sentences. In the case of dating and finding a match, a photo simply does not and can not say it all.

This nouveau romantic discovery process encourages those of us with the Seinfeldian ability to fixate on the smallest physical “flaw” to write someone off even quicker. Receding hairline? Meh. Slightly crooked teeth? Pass. When it comes to the personal information people do put down, dating sites rarely encourage any sort of creativity, beyond listing likes and dislikes. Loves Joni Mitchell, cat embroidery designs and kittens named Lady Chatterley? No, thanks.

And while I know I’m not alone in thinking along these lines, I wonder whether I end up overlooking people I’d have in-person chemistry with simply because someone hotter, smarter and funnier might be on the next Web page. Because I’m pretty sure if online dating had existed back in the 1980s, my parents — who validate the old adage “opposites attract” to a tee — would never had met.

Tech offers people a layer of distance and anonymity in dating they can’t find elsewhere, which in turn affects etiquette. Even if our photos are up there, our contact information isn’t. We don’t have to worry about the consequences of hurting someone’s feelings the same way we would if we were picking up someone up at a bar. The lack of actual in-person interaction, at least initially, emboldens online daters to be ruthlessly honest. On OKCupid, one person I was interested in sweetly replied, “EW, GOD. NEVER,” which was enough to send me to the local 7-Eleven for a pint of Haagen Daaz to nurse my bruised ego.

People are also increasingly doing their research with Google search. Sure, we want to check that we’re not about to spend our evening with a black widow or Jack the Ripper, but sheer curiosity also means we’ll research the heck out of these dates, to the point where it’s essentially a background search, sapping serendipity out of the discovery process. Meanwhile, more and more people Facebook Friend their dates right after or even before meeting them — which seems a tad premature given things may not work out.

Dumping 2.0

Dumping has quite simply never been easier, thanks to the proliferation of communication channels and devices. I’ve seen friends stood up via text five minutes before the date was supposed to start, observed college break-ups via Facebook message followed by ugly Wall-to-Wall conversations — the 21st century equivalent of public blowout at a restaurant — and I’ve taken friends out for conciliatory drinks after they’ve received fanciful texts like, “sory 2 do this but its not werking out. ur great tho. good luck.”

People clearly hide behind technology to avoid doing the deed face-to-face. I know this, having been on the receiving end, and having spinelessly done it once or twice myself with emails like: “You’re a brilliant, kind person, but I didn’t feel the chemistry you and I both know are required to make a relationship great. … No doubt, you will make someone very happy.” (Not my proudest moment.)

The dating site Chemistry.com offers what amounts to a dumping feature for “First Meetings,” or first dates arranged through the service. Say you’re just not that into them: fill out some feedback online, and once your date does the same, they get a standard cookie-cutter message telling them to move on. Better than never getting back to them at all, but not by much. The feature is sort of the modern-day equivalent of giving someone you were talking to in a bar the number from the dry-cleaner awning across the street — the wrong number does the dirty work for you.

Of course, all these services and devices aren’t solely to blame for our modern-day misadventures. Match, Facebook, and that nifty smartphone are just tools — means to ends — intended to make life easier. As many couples will attest, they have: success stories abound, crediting technology in one way or another as their 21st century Cupid. (They don’t lie. One of my friends found her soul mate on MySpace.)

But the responsibility still falls on us to act decently, online and in person, even when it’s now become possible to write someone off based on a thumbnail photo or quirky hobby; to dump someone in 50 characters or less; or to stalk a person from the comfort of our snazzy new Chevrolet.

August 18, 2011

This Is What ’Computer Dating’ Looked Like In The 1960s

Filed under: computer, dating, match, students, survey — Tags: , , , , — admin @ 9:32 am

Forty years before Mark Zuckerberg came up with Facebook, a few Harvard students created Operation Match, the precursor to online dating. The New Yorker reports that in 1965, Lewis Altfest, a 25-year-old accountant, and his friend Robert Ross, a computer programmer for IBM, then made their own version: Project TACT (Technical Automated Compatibility Testing) for young New Yorkers living on the Upper East Side.

Clients paid $5 and answered more than a hundred questions, such as whether women would prefer to “find their ideal man in a camp chopping wood, in a studio painting a canvas, or in a garage working a pillar drill.” The answers were fed into an IBM 1400 Series computer, “which then spit out your matches, five blue cards, if you were a woman, or five pink ones, if you were a man.”

TACT eventually spread all over New York, but was well ahead of its time, given that it was suspect in a criminal investigation after the Kings County Board of Education noticed students filling out “questionable” dating surveys. In this unbelievable 1966 New York Times article, “Boy-Girl Questionnaires Investigated” then-Brooklyn District Attorney Aaron E. Koota asked a grand jury to consider whether it was a crime to invite students to “Pick ’em cuter by computer”:

“The potential danger to physical safety and morals is clear. Some control is essential to prevent criminals, racketeers and sex deviates from this profitable field.”

Today, Match.com is the largest dating site in the world, with an estimated 20 million members.

August 9, 2011

The Rules of Engagement

Filed under: call, date, dating, facebook, friend, match, phone, singles, women — Tags: , , , , , , , , — admin @ 9:30 am

With more than 105 million singles in the United States, or one-third of the population, the singles scene remains a competitive playing field. Match.com, the leading online dating network, has taken an in-depth look at the behavior of singles and uncovered new dating habits based on a groundbreaking study of more than 5,000 single Americans. This unprecedented research has found that, while some traditional dating do’s and don’ts still exist, the playing field has definitely changed.

“It’s important for singles to know that the dating rules have changed,” says Whitney Casey, Relationship Expert for Match.com. “This study finds that dating behaviors drastically differ between the ages. Younger singles are more likely to friend their date on Facebook, communicate by text after a date, and be evasive about their availability if they’re not interested in a second date. Whereas older singles are more cautious when it comes to dating in the digital era.”

Specific highlights include:

Tradition Still Applies – Men, women still expect you to make the first move and ask a lady out, and although 41% of women would offer to pick up the check on a first date, a majority of men (37%) still feel they should foot the bill.

Bailout Plan – Both men and women agree that 15 minutes into the date is long enough to tell if there is chemistry (31%). However, if the date isn’t going as planned, only 12% of singles would actually call it a night and leave within the first 30 minutes of the date.

Thanks, but No Thanks – If your date isn’t getting the hint that you aren’t a match made in heaven, most singles feel that honesty is the best policy. 52% of those surveyed agree you should politely explain you aren’t interested, followed by 24% of singles who recommend being evasive about your future availability. However, younger singles are most likely to ignore your calls and send you straight to voicemail.

Too Fast on a First Date? – 6.5% of singles claim they have frequently had sex on the first date, while 80% of singles disapprove of ending the date between the sheets.

Making the Call – 48% of women prefer men to make the follow up call after the first date. Only 6% of men follow up within the first 24 hours, while the majority of men (68%) will play it cool and pick up the phone between one to three days after the date.

There’s No Place Like Phone – Although 64% of singles are open to having post-date conversations via text and email, more than 80% of singles still prefer conversations on the phone.

To Friend or Not to Friend? – Younger singles (ages 21-34) think it’s OK to add a date as a Facebook friend after 2-3 dates (26%), while 11% of singles between the ages of 35-44 wait to friend a date on Facebook until it becomes an exclusive relationship.

Meet the Guys – Yes, it is OK to introduce your new romantic interest to the ones who know you best. Men are more likely to introduce someone they’re interested in to their friends within the first month of dating than women are, regardless of their age group (nearly 50% of men vs. 35% of women).

The wildest live webcams
Real sex just a click away
Hook up with the hottest men!
Languages: English | Español | Français | Deutsch | Italiano