Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Don't put so much stock in an online dating algorithm. He was just trying to illustrate how perfect everything seemed, how sure of everything he was, until suddenly that stable-seeming foundation fell out from under him.

There's no way that in a post that explores the limits of technology, he's actually trying to make some claim that he missed a huge red flag in an online dating algorithm's output, nor that we should interpret the situation in that way.




> Don't put so much stock in an online dating algorithm.

I wouldn't put so much stock in someone like eHarmony, but OkCupid--sure! Those guys use math!

disclaimer: I work for OkCupid Labs.


The fact that you use math doesn't prove anything, especially in an area as complicated as human relationship.


eHarmony uses math!

OKCupid uses reader-generated surveys.


I would say eHarmony relies on pyschology; okCupid on sociology or anthropology.

Was somewhat disappointed when okCupid was acquired by match.com.


Good point; you're right that the example does a good job illustrating their optimism.

I agree with you that we shouldn't put too much stock in these algorithms. Still, it's interesting that OK Cupid reached the same conclusion as Alex's wife: we're too different.

The enemy part is particularly interesting because it indicates conflict. The story would seem different if it was like "Ok cupid says we're 70% match but we think we're 99% match!". Instead, it's OKCupid saying: "you have conflicts" and the couple deciding to move forward despite those conflicts.

I'm not trying to make a big point here; I just find this part of the story fascinating.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: