• TheGrandNagusEnglish
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    4 months ago
    edit-2
    4 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    In some ways I can see this being potentially problematic, however

    For-profit dating apps (i.e. all dating apps) are shit.

    Not only do they aggressively restrict a lot of basic features behind shockingly expensive paywalls, but they also mess around with the recommendation algorithm to make you feel like you feel like you have to get the premium tier in order to even be seen sometimes.

    Plus they’re literally incentivised to keep you on the app - not match you up with someone permanently. And once you’ve proven you’re someone who’s willing to pay, they really won’t want to let you go.

    A publicly-owned dating app shouldn’t have these issues. Japan is incentivised to make good matches - they want to boost birthrates and curb the loneliness pandemic they’re experiencing.

    I just hope Japan is a country that takes privacy and security seriously.

    E: btw I mean publicly owned as in owned by the Japanese public, not as in publicly traded.

    • rottingleafEnglish
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      4 months ago
      edit-2
      4 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      A publicly-owned dating app shouldn’t have these issues.

      If someone’s job inside that company, even publicly owned, depends on the amount of users, they are incentivized to do all the same things. And publicly-owned companies too try to be kinda profitable sometimes. There’s also corruption.

      EDIT:

      I just hope Japan is a country that takes privacy and security seriously.

      Governments don’t.

      • magic_lobster_party
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        4 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Governments are incentivized to match people to combat declining birth rates. Lower birth rates means fewer productive people to support an aging population. It’s also loss in taxes.

        • rottingleafEnglish
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          4 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Governments have no incentives. People working in them have some. Having more youngsters questioning what they are doing, working and thus not relying on aid, may be less convenient than all those old people living on pensions voting for something stupid.

          • TheGrandNagusEnglish
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            4 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Governments have no incentives. People working in them have some.

            By this logic, companies also aren’t incentivised to do anything, just the people working in them.

            Governments do have incentives. Saying they don’t is absurd.

            • rottingleafEnglish
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              4 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Correct. Companies are not. And what they do makes sense if you look at it this way. You could even notice how this reinforces the leftist positions on economics popular here, if your thinking were just a bit more agile.

              Saying they don’t is absurd.

              This is not very persuasive and seems to lack any elaboration of how would that work. From the ground up, like every good elaboration does.

              Governments do have incentives.

              Which ones then? I’m certain I’ll be able to disprove any of them.

              • TheGrandNagusEnglish
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                4 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                No, not correct, because your take is insane.

                Of course governments, companies, and other institutions have incentives. Maybe if your thinking we’re just a bit more agile (translation: if you were a bit less stupid), you’d recognise that.

                • rottingleafEnglish
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago
                  link
                  fedilink

                  A structure of humans does not possess the same traits as a human. Are you going to argue with that?

                  Insults can’t fix your inability to reason.

                  I don’t see any arguments from you to recognize. “Of course” is not one, just like “I assure you”, and “your take is insane” is the same. Shouldn’t have considered Star Trek a smart show in your childhood, judging by the nickname.

                  • TheGrandNagusEnglish
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    0
                    ·
                    4 months ago
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago
                    link
                    fedilink

                    It’s not even worth explaining because it’s so obvious that they do. If you said that eating chicken raw is good for you I also wouldn’t bother explaining why that’s not true. I’d just call it out as nonsense.

                    You insulted me first, dipshit. Quit advertising to the world how stupid you are. I don’t know what kind of brainrot you’re experiencing, but you should get it looked at.

                    You’re honestly arguing that companies aren’t incentivised to do things like make profit? Or retain employees? You are brain-dead lmao