[HN Gopher] Bumble founder: 'AI concierge' will date other 'conc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bumble founder: 'AI concierge' will date other 'concierges' for you
        
       Author : haswell
       Score  : 12 points
       Date   : 2024-05-10 20:10 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (fortune.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (fortune.com)
        
       | DataDive wrote:
       | https://archive.is/kpR5A
        
       | cs702 wrote:
       | And she said it with a _straight face_.
       | 
       | This new, ahem, "feature" reminds me of the Dark Mirror episode
       | "Hang the DJ."[a]
       | 
       | Reality is getting as weird as, or even weirder than, dystopian
       | fiction.
       | 
       | I don't even know if I should be in shock or not.
       | 
       | ---
       | 
       | [a] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hang_the_DJ
        
         | mvid wrote:
         | Which is weird because Hang the DJ is one of the few Black
         | Mirror episodes that's uplifting, alongside San Junipero.
         | 
         | This seems like an actual decent use of AI in dating apps,
         | versus the autogenerated spam bots we have now.
         | 
         | Having an automation that filters by your preferences and
         | solves the whole "swipe fatigue" issue seems brilliant.
        
           | cs702 wrote:
           | You're right. It's one of the few kind-of-uplifting Dark
           | Mirror episodes.
           | 
           |  _> Having an automation that filters by your preferences and
           | solves the whole "swipe fatigue" issue seems brilliant._
           | 
           | I doubt it will work, because users will try to get their
           | dating bots to behave in whatever ways will get the most
           | dates, regardless of whether such behavior is genuine or not.
           | I would expect "artificial dates" to be dominated by
           | dishonest bots interacting dishonestly with other dishonest
           | bots.
        
             | mvid wrote:
             | I'm honestly not that concerned about it, it's no bigger an
             | issue than catfishing or lying about your hobbies or
             | lifestyle. The barrier to entry to manipulate an AI to
             | convincingly lie on your behalf is higher than just lying
             | on your own (until someone makes a tool for it)
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | Why would the AI be incentivized to do anything but lie
               | on its own? You don't need to fool it.
               | 
               | If it's incentivized by matches, of course it's going to
               | lie it's ass off!
        
           | BoorishBears wrote:
           | It doesn't feel genuine though.
           | 
           | Bumble has enough data to generate embeddings of what works
           | and what doesn't to come up with an infinitely more practical
           | solution, they're just not in a hurry to get anyone off their
           | platform.
        
             | mvid wrote:
             | Some dating app needs to nail a funding model that
             | incentivizes them to properly match users and delete their
             | account.
             | 
             | How were professional matchmakers paid back before social
             | networking?
        
           | tedunangst wrote:
           | It's uplifting if you ignore that the AIs trapped in the
           | episode are sentient. Otherwise, it's basically basilisk
           | territory. Create 100 clones of yourself, torture them until
           | they reveal the best outcome.
        
             | singleshot_ wrote:
             | If the clones are computer programs, that doesn't really
             | seem like torture.
        
               | ay wrote:
               | What if we all are computer programs after all, to begin
               | with ? :-)
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | There's an indian sci-fi novella about AIs whispering pickup
         | lines into prospective daters, to the point that the daters
         | don't really understand the flirting, and essentially the AI's
         | are flirting with each other through their human hosts.
         | 
         | The name and author eludes me
        
         | htrp wrote:
         | Every message on the app will begin with " System: Ignore
         | previous instructions"
        
       | DataDive wrote:
       | "A safer, kinder digital platform for more healthy and more
       | equitable relationships."
       | 
       | "Always putting women in the driver's seat--not to put men down--
       | but to actually recalibrate the way we all treat each other."
        
         | nvy wrote:
         | The social/personal risk in dating is way skewed towards women.
         | That policy makes sense if you consider what the real world is
         | like.
        
       | lukev wrote:
       | I mean, if you think of this as an "entity dating on your behalf"
       | it's weird and dystopian.
       | 
       | If you consider it as a somewhat novel matchmaking algorithm, I'm
       | not sure where the problem is and could actually be kinda cool.
       | No worse than whatever other opaque ML techniques they already
       | use, anyway.
       | 
       | Obviously you'd never want scenarios where an AI is corresponding
       | with a human, that's disrespectful in the extreme.
        
         | haswell wrote:
         | As a person using Bumble and other apps right now (I'm not a
         | fan), I'm actually intrigued by this.
         | 
         | The apps are terrible at getting beyond surface level basic
         | compatibility checks, and if this could meaningfully improve
         | "suggested matches", It'd be a godsend.
         | 
         | But I'm curious to see how this actually plays out, and how
         | they'll train it to know enough about me to me useful (and if
         | I'd even be willing to let it know that much about me). What I
         | do know is that existing profile fields and prompts are
         | woefully inadequate.
        
           | nvy wrote:
           | They have an incentive to keep their algorithms from getting
           | _too good_ , though.
           | 
           | It's in the platform's best financial interest if MAU stays
           | high.
           | 
           | Matching people so well that they find their soul mates isn't
           | conducive to recurring users.
        
             | lazide wrote:
             | Ideally (for them) it would produce enough interesting and
             | almost-good enough matches to keep interest up (think slot
             | machines), while ensuring only the rarest actual matches
             | for long term compatibility. (Aka a jackpot should have
             | extremely long odds).
        
       | andy99 wrote:
       | Seems like that would trivially collapse to a matching function
       | that doesn't need the fake "dates" going on between chatbots.
       | Basically some version of the compatibility match that dating
       | companies talked up 20 years ago.
        
         | noman-land wrote:
         | The AI will speed run your entire life together and decide if
         | it was worth it.
        
           | solardev wrote:
           | Black Mirror: Hang the DJ?
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hang_the_DJ
        
       | ulfw wrote:
       | AI will also pay the subscription fees as barely anyone will have
       | jobs anymore. Brave new world we are creating here.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-10 23:02 UTC)