your profile will not be shown as frequently to other women, even those who might be attracted to your idiosyncrasies. (Tinder implements this through assigning each user Elo rating which goes up every time someone swipes right on them and down every time someone swipes left. Profiles with lower ratings are shown less frequently.)
This was true for the past for Tinder, but Tinder itself claims that it stopped doing the Elo rating thing. If you think they still do that, on what basis do you hold that belief?
I saw a talk from one of their engineers which implied that their “deep learning” algorithm was more marketing than a core redesign.
I also agree with Lincoln that, regardless of whether there is literally a field in their database called “elo”, more attractive profiles are shown more frequently. One easy example of this is the “top picks” feature, which has one section for people with similar interests to you, but another is just people who are generically hot.
Regardless of the precise mechanism, Tinder almost certainly shows more attractive people more often. If it didn’t, it would have a retention problem because there are lots of people who swipe tinder to fantasize about matching with hot people, and they wouldn’t get enough hot people to keep them going. Most likely, Tinder has determined a precise ratio of “hot people” and “people in your league” to show you, in order to keep you swiping.
Given the existence of the incentive and likelihood that Tinder et al. would follow such an incentive, it makes sense to try to have your profile be more generally attractive so you get shown to more people.
Tinder can do a lot of machine learning to pick up on factors that make you more attractive to certain people and less attractive to others.
There are some girls who like to date nerds and other’s for whom it’s a negative. If you do signal that you are a nerd Tinder can use that to show you to the kind of girls who like nerds.
There’s an old OkCupid trends article that argues that doing things that increase your attractiveness with some people and decrease it with others can be benefitial even if it decreases your average attractiveness.
They can do that, but there’s no strong reason to believe that they did do that.
The fact that they write articles about how they are not using ELO anymore is a strong reason to believe that they don’t and do something more complex.
This was true for the past for Tinder, but Tinder itself claims that it stopped doing the Elo rating thing. If you think they still do that, on what basis do you hold that belief?
I saw a talk from one of their engineers which implied that their “deep learning” algorithm was more marketing than a core redesign.
I also agree with Lincoln that, regardless of whether there is literally a field in their database called “elo”, more attractive profiles are shown more frequently. One easy example of this is the “top picks” feature, which has one section for people with similar interests to you, but another is just people who are generically hot.
Regardless of the precise mechanism, Tinder almost certainly shows more attractive people more often. If it didn’t, it would have a retention problem because there are lots of people who swipe tinder to fantasize about matching with hot people, and they wouldn’t get enough hot people to keep them going. Most likely, Tinder has determined a precise ratio of “hot people” and “people in your league” to show you, in order to keep you swiping.
Given the existence of the incentive and likelihood that Tinder et al. would follow such an incentive, it makes sense to try to have your profile be more generally attractive so you get shown to more people.
Tinder can do a lot of machine learning to pick up on factors that make you more attractive to certain people and less attractive to others.
There are some girls who like to date nerds and other’s for whom it’s a negative. If you do signal that you are a nerd Tinder can use that to show you to the kind of girls who like nerds.
There’s an old OkCupid trends article that argues that doing things that increase your attractiveness with some people and decrease it with others can be benefitial even if it decreases your average attractiveness.
They can do that, but there’s no strong reason to believe that they did do that.
The fact that they write articles about how they are not using ELO anymore is a strong reason to believe that they don’t and do something more complex.