frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Open in hackernews

What dating apps are optimizing. Hint: It isn't love

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-dating-apps-optimizing-hint-isnt.html
56•i7l•2h ago

Comments

diego_moita•1h ago
Very interesting read.

> Dating apps don't sell love. They sell the feeling that it is one premium upgrade away. The platforms aren't primarily designed for users to find love and promptly delete the apps from their phones. They're designed to keep users swiping.

So they're not very different from porn and Facebook, right? They sell an illusion of the real thing that isn't fullfilling but is addicting.

IncreasePosts•1h ago
Does anyone think dating apps sell love? I'm pretty sure everyone who actually uses it within the expected bounds uses it as a way to find people to date, which is very different from love.
christina97•1h ago
The article does not actually substantiate the claim in its title. All references are simply to articles that (at best) describe how people respond to dating apps.

I would not at all be surprised if some or even most dating apps had a team or org in charge of making the platform “good” for users (using some metrics that really do correlate to what we would think of as a desirable experience); and a somewhat disconnected group of people aiming to increase revenue. This is a pretty standard way of trying to align incentives.

It does not take a genius to figure out that to capture value in the long term requires producing some real value for users.

caseysoftware•1h ago
I worked for a dating website a long time ago.. and it's key to understand their business model:

- If you find good matches but not great matches, you stick around.

- If you get frustrated and give up, they lose one customer.

- If you find love and get married, they lose two customers.

Which one will they optimize for?

My writeup: https://caseysoftware.com/blog/working-for-a-dating-website

t-writescode•58m ago
It’s really disappointing because, a human matchmaker, on the other hand, *does* optimize for “losing 2 customers”. Wouldn’t it be way better for the company’s long-term-health if they charged an appropriate price for making, actually, great connections?

“I found my wife on FindLove” is one hell of a marketing campaign for *future* sales. It’s not like people never break up, and it’s not like people don’t continually enter the dating market or move or whatever.

quantummagic•58m ago
That doesn't account from the good-will and word-of-mouth generated from any successful matches, which presumably could lead to many more customers than those lost due to marriage.
bawolff•42m ago
I feel like that kind of word of mouth is not enough to compensate. Like how many customers is word of one sucessful match expected to attract?
JambalayaJimbo•22m ago
“I met my husband on hinge” is something that gets people to download the app right away. I’ve seen it happen tons of times
raincole•8m ago
Very anecdotal, but in my experience people have no attachment to or enthusiasm for dating apps. I've heard (acquainted) couples say the met on dating apps. No one ever said which ones.
rkomorn•6m ago
My counter anecdote would be that almost every time I mention my spouse and I met on a dating app, people ask me which one.

Edit: people ask me which app, not which spouse.

roenxi•35m ago
> If you find good matches but not great matches, you stick around.

I dunno, I have difficulty seeing how the dating sites could singlehandedly pull that off in the average case without the site users really leaning in to help. It would seem to run into the basic reality that men and women historically pick the best match from a fairly small pool of people. A dating sites can't do worse than that even if they're trying. If people are willing to use the same standards as all their ancestors then they'd pair off quickly.

It seems more likely that there is just a natural dead-sea effect because of that where the people on the sites over the long term are not the sort of people you'd settle down with, and there is also this subtle idea that the dating site is there to find someone a perfect match (probably doesn't exist to start with). Those are design issues that go a lot deeper than any algorithm the sites might be using.

chongli•25m ago
That's because "matches" are the wrong criterion to look at. In aggregate, matches don't matter. What matters is the population of marriageable (or otherwise amenable to long-term relationships) people. And that's what the dating app calculus works against. Every time 2 marriageable people get together, they remove themselves from the pool. If there is not a significant influx of new marriageable people then over time the marriageability of the pool will decline. As it drops, the concentration of "serial daters" goes up.

In a high concentration of serial daters, no one wants to pair off because there isn't anyone worth pairing off with around.

Retric•11m ago
> If there is not a significant influx of new marriageable people then over time the marriageability of the pool will decline

That seems to be extremely unlikely, people have finite lifespans and are only in the marriage pool for a small fraction of that. More importantly your website could easily be targeted to an even smaller pool say 25-45 and ignoring deaths and divorce your already ~10% turnover per year if you own 100% of the market. Actual numbers depends on what percentage of the pool starts married, becomes a widow etc but their’s plenty of new people to make up for any couples. Further, happily married couples are great advertising.

ergocoder•9m ago
Number 3.

Imagine if you can advertise that 50% of the matches on your app leads to marriage.

foxfired•46m ago
The app didn't work for me. One that was shared right here on HN. I selected 25 miles radius, same ethnicity. Naturally I was matched with a person 700 miles away, of different ethnicity. So we got married... and deleted the app.

We were interviewed as a success story and our faces are plastered on the Internet now. My friends didn't find the same success, I concluded that they didn't know how to date. (wear the right clothes, etiquettes, conversation, navigate ghosting, etc.)

"What if the app could teach you how to do just that?" That's what I asked in our interview. That part was never published.

kazinator•42m ago
It goes without saying that they are optimizing for engagement with their platform/app and user growth, just like every last digital huckster on the internet.

To keep people hooked while making them feel that the app is working, even though they are not getting their end result.

ergocoder•11m ago
Because it's almost impossible to optimize for love. like how?
Bayko•4m ago
That is the companies problem to solve. They are the ones making the product.
rich_sasha•5m ago
With my Hanlon Razor hat on, how much is this deliberate vs. natural emergent behaviour?

It if course true that the incentives on the platform are to prevent permanent relationships. But can they really tell "these two would make a very good match so let's keep them apart, this match here is at best adequate, let's do this one instead"? My gut feeling would be that they cannot tell.

But then of course the whole design of the platform prevents deep connection. About 70-80% of the information is encoded in a photo that is not even guaranteed to be realistic. And the point of the platform is to be a rich marketplace where you keep trying. That's the USP before you get into any further design choices.

Platforms like Harmony Online existed for a long time and IIUC they were optimising for long term matches, and for whatever reason they were not as popular as eg Tinder.

NPMX – a fast, modern browser for the NPM registry

https://npmx.dev
33•slymax•2h ago•13 comments

Show HN: Data Engineering Book – An open source, community-driven guide

https://github.com/datascale-ai/data_engineering_book/blob/main/README_en.md
104•xx123122•6h ago•8 comments

GPT-5.2 derives a new result in theoretical physics

https://openai.com/index/new-result-theoretical-physics/
413•davidbarker•9h ago•272 comments

Common Lisp Screenshots: today's CL applications in action

http://www.lisp-screenshots.org
52•_emacsomancer_•2d ago•9 comments

Building a TUI is easy now

https://hatchet.run/blog/tuis-are-easy-now
160•abelanger•10h ago•114 comments

Adventures in Neural Rendering

https://interplayoflight.wordpress.com/2026/02/10/adventures-in-neural-rendering/
10•ingve•3d ago•0 comments

Gradient.horse

https://gradient.horse
151•microflash•4d ago•35 comments

Font Rendering from First Principles

https://mccloskeybr.com/articles/font_rendering.html
112•krapp•6d ago•15 comments

The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

https://www.politico.eu/article/tiktok-meta-facebook-instagram-brussels-kill-infinite-scrolling/
410•danso•7h ago•403 comments

gRPC: From service definition to wire format

https://kreya.app/blog/grpc-deep-dive/
103•latonz•4d ago•12 comments

What dating apps are optimizing. Hint: It isn't love

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-dating-apps-optimizing-hint-isnt.html
56•i7l•2h ago•19 comments

OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

https://theconversation.com/openai-has-deleted-the-word-safely-from-its-mission-and-its-new-struc...
395•DamnInteresting•6h ago•209 comments

Monosketch

https://monosketch.io/
733•penguin_booze•16h ago•130 comments

Show HN: Skill that lets Claude Code/Codex spin up VMs and GPUs

https://cloudrouter.dev/
109•austinwang115•9h ago•29 comments

The Blurred Line Between Video Calling and Live Streaming Software

https://www.red5.net/blog/between-video-calling-and-live-streaming-software/
17•mondainx•4d ago•2 comments

I'm not worried about AI job loss

https://davidoks.blog/p/why-im-not-worried-about-ai-job-loss
196•ezekg•9h ago•338 comments

Show HN: I spent 3 years reverse-engineering a 40 yo stock market sim from 1986

https://www.wallstreetraider.com/story.html
54•benstopics•4d ago•22 comments

How did the Maya survive?

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2026/feb/12/apocalypse-no-how-almost-everything-we-thought-we-kn...
112•speckx•13h ago•90 comments

An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me – More Things Have Happened

https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on-me-part-2/
281•scottshambaugh•3h ago•151 comments

Advanced Aerial Robotics Made Simple

https://www.drehmflight.com
114•jacquesm•5d ago•9 comments

WolfSSL sucks too, so now what?

https://blog.feld.me/posts/2026/02/wolfssl-sucks-too/
90•thomasjb•18h ago•72 comments

Stanford Review: Is YC for Cowards?

https://stanfordreview.org/is-yc-for-cowards/
17•hedgehog0•1h ago•3 comments

CSS-Doodle

https://css-doodle.com/
137•dsego•20h ago•15 comments

The wonder of modern drywall

https://www.worksinprogress.news/p/the-wonder-of-modern-drywall
78•jger15•1d ago•132 comments

Faster Than Dijkstra?

https://systemsapproach.org/2026/02/09/faster-than-dijkstra/
113•drbruced•4d ago•68 comments

Green’s Dictionary of Slang - Five hundred years of the vulgar tongue

https://greensdictofslang.com/
94•mxfh•5d ago•14 comments

Fix the iOS keyboard before the timer hits zero or I'm switching back to Android

https://ios-countdown.win/
1343•ozzyphantom•14h ago•677 comments

Implementing Auto Tiling with Just 5 Tiles

https://www.kyledunbar.dev/2026/02/05/Implementing-auto-tiling-with-just-5-tiles.html
84•todsacerdoti•6d ago•15 comments

Show HN: Moltis – AI assistant with memory, tools, and self-extending skills

https://www.moltis.org
96•fabienpenso•1d ago•36 comments

Sandwich Bill of Materials

https://nesbitt.io/2026/02/08/sandwich-bill-of-materials.html
213•zdw•5d ago•25 comments