I just want to focus on this one Q&A:
You’re quite bullish on A.I. I’ve heard you talk about it. How are you imagining A.I. functioning in this next iteration of the app?
Let’s say we could train A.I. on thousands of what we perceive as great profiles, and the A.I. can get so sophisticated at understanding: “Wow, this person has a thoughtful bio. This person has photos that are not blurry. They’re not all group photos. They’re not wearing sunglasses. We can see who they are clearly and we understand that they took time.” The A.I. can now select the best people and start showing the best people the best people and start getting you to a match quicker, more efficiently, more thoughtfully. The goal for Bumble over the next few years is to become the world’s smartest matchmaker. This is beyond love....
How do you become one of the best people who will be shown the best people? Obviously, you will use A.I. And so everyone using the app will also use A.I. to refine their profile, photos including, into something that A.I. has come to believe is best, and these A.I. bests will be paired up with other A.I. bests. Where, if anywhere, are the humans?
Posts
22 comments:
Automated Intelligence is not discerning. AI will affirmatively approve the biases of its Anthropogenic Intelligence creators. Maybe better, maybe worse than the methods and practices used by your own AI.
Where's the Humans? AI studies humans. AI is everybody.
AI is a blindly curated version of "everybody," snipped and pruned without really understanding what it has lost in the process. As long as women use dating apps to get laid every time they are horny, and make themselves unable to pair bond long term, their body and subconscious doesn't know that it's "just for fun," and so they become unable to live in a marriage with ups and downs, and as long as men use these apps to prey on these women, dating apps are gonna be what dating apps are. A wrong turn leading to some dystopian future that nobody would consciously choose, except, of course, for the people getting rich off of it.
But DNA research says that most men in the history of the species never passed on their genes, so the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Old Whitney influenced a herd. AI, AI, Oh. And in that herd were ladies and germs. AI, AI, Ooh. With a Carbon here, and a Carbon there, an electron everywhere. Old Whitney influenced a herd. AI, AI, #YouToo.
Where are the humans?
The best humans are taken. They're not on dating sites.
"The A.I. can now select the best people and start showing the best people the best people and start getting you to a match quicker, more efficiently, more thoughtfully."
This is what comes of thinking locally about a global problem. "Showing the best people the best people" is only going to get you to a match if you are one of them. And chances are, you aren't.
Radiohead’s Paranoid Android is a fucking prophecy
When do we decide that online dating aps are a horrible idea?
Correction: She founded Tinder, left Tinder, founded Bumble, left Bumble, and now is returning to Bumble
Wolfe Herd?!?
Doesn't she know that wolves are pack animals?
And have you ever heard a pack? I have. They sound really cool. Unless you're their prey, in which case you'd better pray.
I don't know dating sites firsthand. What she's describing, though, is people trying to cheat. Sunglasses, group photos, blurry pix. You don't post these things when you're confident. If she's using AI to winnow the less forthright, then ok. She says "best", but maybe she means "serious".
There’s the abstract version of what you think you want in a partner, and then there’s what clicks in real life. In theory, there’s no difference between theory and practice.
Oh noes! People we don't know seek sex with means we disapprove of.
Whatever will become of the world?
Ibble Dibble ripped apart Herd's rather minor but lucrative role in Tinder on youtube, after Meghan Markle interviewed her. Neither seems terribly bright or interesting, unlike the snarky ID.
The Incredible Backstory Meghan Didn't Ask A Single Question About
The A.I. can now select the best people and start showing the best people the best people
Oh, the best people are already seeing the best people. They're just seeing everyone else as well.
The tipping point will be to show the average people only the average people and the worst people only the worst people, thus aligning expectations across the board.
Was it on this blog that someone noted the death of eugenics a week or so ago? It won't die. AI will be running it, to match the best people with the best people. And if you are one of them and don't comply, you'll face the consequences.
>and these A.I. bests will be paired up with other A.I. bests. Where, if anywhere, are the humans?<
Off screwing AI-controlled sex robots?
Plot point of Accountant 2 I watched the other day. Still have to close.
"Where, if anywhere, are the humans?" Sitting at home, virtual wallflowers, feeling dumb, because they are, not "the best."
Anyway, wouldn't a better business model for an AI-driven dating site promise the right match for everybody? Like, a better, more predictive version of the models used so far? Though I guess LLMs don't do serious quant stuff.
What's love gotta to do with it?
AInteresting but AInal.
Ai will be able to surreptitiously acquire and provide all info about potential date. Age , marital status,inome, IPaddress, address, financed, criminal records, divores, children, photoshopped, immigration status. eyc.
Have fun!
Think about the poor schmutz that puts in a profile, gets it prettied up using AI and is advised by the app, ‘Sorry, dude, this ain’t happening.’
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.