[encoderer]

Tinder has changed everything here. Top grossing app last year. Real genius is not the swipe interface it’s the double opt-in that solves a lot of the signal v noise problem on old time dating sites like okcupid, match, etc.

[Karrot_Kream]

Dating is still pretty broken for minorities or people who aren't into the heteronormative scene. Grindr has been great for gay men, but for minority folks (whether they be part of a minority group or have minority preferences), dating is still very much unsolved.

[tlb]

HER (https://weareher.com/) is dating for lesbians and other non-heteronormative people.

Color Dating (http://www.colordatingapp.com/) lets you match by race/ethnicity.

Muzmatch (https://muzmatch.com/) has features needed by Muslims.

[All 3 are YC-funded]

[Karrot_Kream]

Oh yeah I love the fact that there are startups in this space, I just meant that dating is not yet solved in the minority space.

[exolymph]

That's a problem with more demand than supply, fundamentally.

[chaostheory]

That feature reminds me of what they had in Logan's Run. A lot of stuff feels like people trying to implement an idea from one of their fav sci-fi books or movies.

[busterarm]

The part where at 30 you're deemed useless to society?

[failrate]

That definitely sounds like Tinder to me.

[chaostheory]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlRMDzHYgt4

[pishpash]

Next step to make it more efficient is to accept rank lists and to federate, solving the matchmaking problem globally.

[matte_black]

No, the next step is to tie in with DNA and ancestry services like 23andMe to help find a real mate for long term relationships and bearing children, and not just short flings or one night stands.

[Xeoncross]

> 23andMe to help find a real mate for long term relationships

Wait. I thought long-term relationships were due to love/care, sacrifice, hard work, a common goal.

[paganel]

The DNA thing sounds dystopian. Maybe that’s where we’re heading, anyway, but it doesn’t feel right.

[matte_black]

To me it sounds like the opposite, a utopia. All throughout history, genes have been passed down through natural selection based on short term traits. If we can select partners based on things like longevity, cancer resistance, disease risks, IQ, we can produce a better world filled with better humans, slowly but surely.

[sebleon]

> better humans

Ah, sounds like you’re into eugenics. Do you believe humans are wise enough to determine what traits are favorable?

Increased longevity, for instance, seems short-sighted. We already have extreme population growth. While natural survival instincts strive to fight death, what’s the net benefit to society of helping more people make it through their 90s?

Phases like childhood and parenthood would become smaller fractions of life, does extending old age make your overall life experience better? Would society progress as quickly with more old people around?

[matte_black]

I think lifespan is only worth increasing if there is a corresponding increase in health span. My grandmothers are both in their 90s and quite lucid and healthy. I would love to be at least in their condition when I’m in my 90s, but I also am serious about exercise and nutrition so I would hope I’d be even better off than them. They do nothing of that sort. Likewise, I’d like to be with a woman at that age who would also be just as healthy, and retain her faculties. Unfortunately, unless I extensively investigate a woman’s family history, I have no way of knowing if she’ll really be capable of living that long. What good is being a very old age if my partner is disabled and limits me from certain activities?

This inequality between lifespans is going to become a much greater concern for humans in the future, you will see. Perhaps it will become most noticeable as the baby boomers begin to die.

Also, I think society could progress even faster if the wisdom and experience of old people can be harnessed and not just tossed aside as “antiquated”. We need to rethink the way we think about the elderly, because one day those elderly will be us.

[adwn]

> We already have extreme population growth.

Actually, many Western countries have the opposite and need large-scale immigration (along with all the societal problems this brings) to maintain their population numbers.

[busterarm]

Part of Stephen Baxter's book Ring describes a large scale (as in population) interstellar trip and engineering the population making that trip for a long lifespan via eugenics.

If I recall correctly, the described humans were living spans greater than 400 years, among other traits, after a handful of generations.

If something as ambitious as Deep Space is your goal, you're probably better off engineering people to make the trip rather than waiting for technology that may never materialize.

[smsm42]

That's terrifying. Every project that aimed at "producing better humans" so far wasn't just terrible - it is ones that are brought up when somebody needs to bring up so terrible no discussion is possible after it, the ultimate peak of terribleness. And yet, there are people still dreaming of breeding "better humans". I hope at least this will be voluntary? Because the logical next step is if you choose "unsuitable" partner, your kid's healthcare will cost 10x (because it's your fault for loading the healthcare with unnecessary costs) and you face deep contempt from your social peers for not helping to improve the human race. At the best case, of course. We all know how worst cases look like.

[matte_black]

I don’t understand why it’s such a taboo. Sperm donors are already selected based on favorable traits. If you’re a loser with no job or have a family history of diseases and cancer they do not want your sperm. And there’s nothing stopping people with poor genetics from breeding promiscuously with multiple women anyway, leaving behind single mothers in their wake. The Darwin Awards are a dark celebration of people dying in stupid avoidable ways and thus “removing themselves from the gene pool”.

People with excellent genetic traits need some sort of advantage to meet each other. The movie Idiocracy may have been a satirical comedy, but its message is actually not far from the truth of where we’re heading if someone doesn’t do something about improving the gene pool. To me, that is way more terrifying than genetically conscious dating.

[volkk]

good thing that chances are you're not in charge of anything major (hopefully)

[matte_black]

I have been interested in eugenics for a long time. At any moment I could really only be a seed round away from putting together a founding team and building out a dating service.

Maybe the time is not quite yet. Maybe genetic mapping services have to improve a bit more, and public opinion has to shift somewhat, but if the conditions ever align, I’ll probably take a shot at it. Biotech is the next great frontier after all, and that’s where I’d like to be.