(???) that power these sites, the possibilities are almost endless.
But the digital revolution is forcing us to ask new questions. Why should we settle for someone who falls short of our expectations if there are thousands of other options a click away? Can commitment thrive in a world of unlimited choice? Can chemistry really be quantified by math geeks?
"A Million First Dates: Solving the Puzzle of Online Dating" was previously published as "Love in the Time of Algorithms: What Technology Does to Meeting and Mating "
The Journalist Dan Slater had written the book "Love in the Time of Algorithms: What Technology Does to Meeting and Mating", but he analyzed actual online dating sites like eHarmony, PerfectMatch, Chemistry, PlentyOfFish, MeeticAffinity, True and others offering compatibillity matching methods which are obsolete since years!
Actual matching algorithms used by eHarmony, Chemistry, PlentyOfFish and others, even behavioural recommender systems, can not be improved, they need to be discarded NOW. Because they are in the range of 3 to 4 prospective mates as selected / recommended / compatible for dating purposes per 1,000 members screened in the database. They all 3 are performing the same for serious daters, with a high percentage of false positives, like gun machines firing flowers.
They can not break the online dating sound barrier!
You do not need to improve a piston engine when you need a jet engine to break sound barrier.
That range convergence phenomenon is what I had called "the online dating sound barrier", in 2003, when I had discovered than problem, 11 long years ago.
Do you want to innovate in the Online Dating Industry?
Read: The 8 tips to innovate in the Online Dating Industry 2014!
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven!