Online Dating & the Scientific Community

So the social science community has also spoken out about the problems with online dating. Much like my previous post, two psychology professors have an article published this month in the research journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest. The current issue features other articles that also delve into the promises of the online dating industry. And let's not forget that it is an industry--a "profit deal," to quote Steve Martin's Navin Johnson character.

Match.com has a 6-month deal for $16.99/mo that includes a "guarantee." I assume that's a guarantee they'll find you a suitable mate--according to their algorithms and 29 dimensions of compatibility. Yeah, right. Let's see, $16.99 x 6 = $101.94, So at a hundred bucks a pop times the roughy 15 million people they claim to have serviced (interesting word choice) since 1995, you can see how the numbers add up (I tried and my TI-83 came up with 5.19894E10, which means that either my math skills are still sorely lacking or that the numbers are astronomically high) But I think the point is made--we're talking big bucks. The capitalist in me can relate.

Bottom line is that an algorithm can only predict how two people (dependent variables) will interact when the circumstances (independent variables) are known. That is, when the situation is totally controlled--like with lab rats.

Not like the real world where people meet, date, talk, form a relationship, make love, argue, problem-solve, compromise, hopefully make better love, etc. etc. etc. (the real independent variables)

So the busy, lonely, socially inept, out-of-practice and curious will continue to use online dating. For 17 years and counting, sites like Match.com have made a ton of money working the matchmaking con, er game, er business. What a sad commentary on our so-called advanced society.

Good luck!

Online Dating with a Broken Picker

Ah, the pitfalls of online dating! Just the phrase "online dating" sounds kind of sad and lonely. There was an old song once that went, "In the year 2525 ... pick your son, pick your daughter too. From the bottom of a long glass tube. Whoa-o-o" Is online dating the precursor to this?

I've known a few people who have tried sites like Match.com, etc. I'm not sure if any of the "dates" worked out, but how bad could it be, really?

Let's see. I get an array of pics to view (I'm sure it's not like the photo lineup from that robbery in Miami a few years back) and a slew of profiles to read (which I am sure are filled with catchy and well thought out, best-foot-forward" info) all of which have been collated for me using an algorithm (I hated Stats class) that includes a index- to ring-finger ratio that measures testosterone levels (huh?) I'll just sort through these--throw out any that look creepy, ugly or like my ex and chose my next hostage, er mate. Right?

The only problem is, I've got a broken picker. I wouldn't know a good man if he sat across the table from me. And that's the real problem with online dating. The lack of interaction that's called "chemistry" which no mathematical genius has been able to successfully replicate thus far. There has to be some sort of spark between two people and I'm not sure that's going to come from a pic and a profile. Sure, you can go through the motions, meet meet these men and women you've chosen face-to-face, but honestly, I barely have time for sleep, let along an hour a pop to figure out a perfect stranger's finger ratios.

And while the divorce rate in the U.S. is down for the period 2000-2010, according to the CDC the marriage rate in this country is also down, which I think is more about money than mojo--or lack there of.

Mom always said, it'll happen when you're NOT looking. Well, she's been right about so many other things. I think I'll give it a try.

Good hunting.

Ah, make that BILLIONS, please!

During dinner last night a friend pointed out that my last post had noted that the Facebook IPO currently under way was valued at about $75 million. Well, make that $75 BILLION with a B.

Rather than just edit the one word, I figured a new post would underscore a point about millions and billions. Most people just don't think in terms of billions of dollars. I mean, to the average John and Jane Q. Public, what's the difference--three zeros. How many of them would ever have to worry about whether their portfolio is ever going to reach the billion dollar mark.

But it also shows that the numbers that are being generated by Wall Street far outpace those of Main Street. And that is no mistake.

MH.

Facebook and the sounds of the 90s

The long-awaited Facebook IPO is in full tilt and market analysts are estimating the offering will net about $75 million--maybe more--for Zuckerberg and the insiders. That of course is mere speculation, but isn't that what the stock market is all about?

 Does anyone remember the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s-early 2000s when equally attractive companies from Silicon Valley to NYC were trading at 1000% above true valuation? Or he real estate market that crashed and burned in 2006? These types of over valuations resulted in people cashing in their 401ks and kid's college funds, mortgaging the house, car and anything else could take to the bank to get into the game.

So the boucoup bucks go to the high rollers. You, me and the estimated 800,000,000 users worldwide will only get more advertising crowding out our chat lists, more privacy infringement and personal info. mining to sustain that advertising, ever-changing security measures to  figure out and less of what we really came for--a place to see and be seen without having to leave our homes.

So go update your status, spread your love life like icing on a cake (stole that from the "Help") and post a funny (or even stupid) video. This is your space--for now.

Namaste