- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Honestly tho a dating site that’s not incentivized to keep people on the dating site makes a lot of sense
Right? Done properly and without profit motivating every decision it could be a good thing. I mean I’m sure someone will find a way to make it creepy and weird, but you never know.
I would legit use it. For-profit dating sites suck
The point of for profit dating apps isn’t to find you a date. It’s to have you engage with the service for as long as possible so they can make money off you.
If you find a long term relationship, they lose a customer.
In some ways I can see this being potentially problematic, however…
For-profit dating apps (i.e. all dating apps) are shit.
Not only do they aggressively restrict a lot of basic features behind shockingly expensive paywalls, but they also mess around with the recommendation algorithm to make you feel like you feel like you have to get the premium tier in order to even be seen sometimes.
Plus they’re literally incentivised to keep you on the app - not match you up with someone permanently. And once you’ve proven you’re someone who’s willing to pay, they really won’t want to let you go.
A publicly-owned dating app shouldn’t have these issues. Japan is incentivised to make good matches - they want to boost birthrates and curb the loneliness pandemic they’re experiencing.
I just hope Japan is a country that takes privacy and security seriously.
E: btw I mean publicly owned as in owned by the Japanese public, not as in publicly traded.
A publicly-owned dating app shouldn’t have these issues.
If someone’s job inside that company, even publicly owned, depends on the amount of users, they are incentivized to do all the same things. And publicly-owned companies too try to be kinda profitable sometimes. There’s also corruption.
EDIT:
I just hope Japan is a country that takes privacy and security seriously.
Governments don’t.
Governments are incentivized to match people to combat declining birth rates. Lower birth rates means fewer productive people to support an aging population. It’s also loss in taxes.
Governments have no incentives. People working in them have some. Having more youngsters questioning what they are doing, working and thus not relying on aid, may be less convenient than all those old people living on pensions voting for something stupid.
Governments have no incentives. People working in them have some.
By this logic, companies also aren’t incentivised to do anything, just the people working in them.
Governments do have incentives. Saying they don’t is absurd.
Correct. Companies are not. And what they do makes sense if you look at it this way. You could even notice how this reinforces the leftist positions on economics popular here, if your thinking were just a bit more agile.
Saying they don’t is absurd.
This is not very persuasive and seems to lack any elaboration of how would that work. From the ground up, like every good elaboration does.
Governments do have incentives.
Which ones then? I’m certain I’ll be able to disprove any of them.
No, not correct, because your take is insane.
Of course governments, companies, and other institutions have incentives. Maybe if your thinking we’re just a bit more agile (translation: if you were a bit less stupid), you’d recognise that.
A structure of humans does not possess the same traits as a human. Are you going to argue with that?
Insults can’t fix your inability to reason.
I don’t see any arguments from you to recognize. “Of course” is not one, just like “I assure you”, and “your take is insane” is the same. Shouldn’t have considered Star Trek a smart show in your childhood, judging by the nickname.
I swear this is the plot to an anime/hentai.
“The Time I Was Forced By The Government Into A Relationship With My Tsundere High-School Sweetheart”
