Dan Ariely on why online dating is so unsatisfying

http://bigthink.com/ideas/20749

by mike • 16 years ago

97 96 16 years ago

I can see his point, but I have very good friends who I'm sure they would say the total opposite. Some found love, some found fun... heck, one even found a Maxim model (and they are still dating).

sliverstorm2• 16 years ago

While I can't help but be a little curious and jealous over the last case, outliers always exist. You do need to make sure that your examples are not outliers, as by their very nature they do not represent the whole.

HeyLaughingBoy2• 16 years ago

Just curious: would you still be jealous if said Maxim model turned out to be a vapid, brain-dead, moron?

blizkreeg• 16 years ago

How to approach online dating in a novel way does keep me up long hours as this is something I'm trying to solve in my startup, albeit for a niche segment of the population.

[Apologies for this next plug] I am very interested in teaming up with a couple of talented and driven hackers and working together if this area interests you. My startup has some initial traction (slightly north of a thousand users) in the two months since launch.

My email is in my bio.

ajg1977• 16 years ago

Good luck in real world dating if you think a coffee date after 5 hours of surfing the web from the comfort of home is a poor ROI.

nhashem• 16 years ago

This sums up my feelings exactly.

Ariely says at one point during the interview: "I mean, imagine that you basically had to drive six hours, three hours each way to have coffee with somebody, and, you know, coffee usually ends up with just coffee."

This analogy is false, because even if the average is six hours, you're free to allocate them however you want. One hour a day for a week, half an hour on your lunch break here, a couple hours on your laptop while watching TV there, etc. If surfing some profiles and exchanging some e-mails is considered the equivalent of driving from New York to Boston to go on a date, that's absurd.

mburney• 16 years ago

How is it not a poor ROI? My experience of "real world" dating has been: 1) Social or physical activities that I enjoy regardless of how many dates I get 2) Meeting/knowing/connecting with people within those activities 3) Flirting with some of those people, which naturally progresses to something more.

It beats wasting 5 hours surfing the web looking for dates.

potatolicious4• 16 years ago

Bingo! If you're constantly pretending to be someone else, and doing things you despise, just for the chance of a date, of course you're miserable!

If you have no interests with many women in it, cultivate others. I used to be all code code code, and other nerdy endeavors, but that simply won't do. There is so much out there, surely you can discover something that suits your interest AND has a population of women?

I moved to Seattle about a year ago - so far as dating goes, this place is a bit of a wasteland (MANY single and desperate software folk here), and while I don't do anything specifically to meet women, I have no qualms about opting for some activities over others. Be yourself - be an optimized version of yourself.

nostrademons• 16 years ago

What if you're surfing the web as a social activity that you enjoy anyway, instead of explicitly looking for dates?

I waste easily 5 hours/week surfing YCombinator. I'm tempted to start hanging out on OKCupid. Not necessarily to find a date, but because then I get to spend my online time with girls instead of guys. (No offense to the guys here, it's just that most of my workday time is spent with guys too, and it gets repetitive after a while...) If it leads to something more, great. If not - what have I lost?

markbao3• 16 years ago

/ It turns out, women really care about men's height. I’m 5’9”, if I wanted to be as attractive as somebody who’s 5’10”, right, another inch? I would have to make about $35-40,000 more a year.

From a 5'7": sorry, what!? Link to paper?

hugh36• 16 years ago

The fact that women like height and money is uncontroversial (sorry dude). I wouldn't believe any exact numbers about how much of one converts to how much of the other.

It could be true in this case though due to the nonlinear utility of money. This guy's a professor of computer science at Duke so he's presumably making good money, maybe $150K? The difference between making $150K and $190K is pretty unimportant, like an extra inch in height, whereas the difference between making $40K and $80K is important, like an extra (I dunno) five inches in height.

For this particular guy, he could probably increase his attractiveness by an equal amount by spending fifty bucks on a decent haircut.

markbao3• 16 years ago

Hahaha. Oh, yes, I'm aware of that, but the amount he mentioned was strange. But yeah, perhaps he was using a nonlinear comparison as you said, which would make more sense.

kadavy4• 16 years ago

Women say they want money, which one study found to be true, only to find no correlation between that preference and the men they actually ended up dating: http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/lie-online-dating-prof...

Oltmann• 16 years ago

I reckon he is citing this article: What Makes You Click? Mate Preferences and Matching Outcomes in Online Dating http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=895442

FTA: "Women, on the other hand, prefer men who are taller than themselves, and they have a particularly strong aversion to shorter men. For example, our estimates imply that compared to a man who is five inches taller than a woman and earns $ 50,000 per year, a man who is five inches shorter than a woman would need to earn slightly more than half a million dollars per year to make up for his shortcoming."

markbao3• 16 years ago

Genetics are serious rubbish. :p

Thank you for that, though. It was a fascinating read.

hugh36• 16 years ago

Notably, all heights are given relative to the woman's height, which is what really matters, not absolute height.

btmorex• 16 years ago

It's interesting how everyone is interpreting this data one way. (the startling way)

Another way to look at it is height has a certain level of importance and how much money you make almost doesn't matter at all. In other words, it takes so much money to make up for the height difference because almost no one actually cares about the money.

augustflanagan• 16 years ago

I only ever went on one internet date. It was the best date of my life and I ended up marrying her 4 years later.

Obviously this a ridiculous statistical outlier, but one of the reasons I always thought it was successful was because we didn't find each other on a huge site like Match.com or Plenty Of Fish. Instead it was through the online dating section of the Seattle Stranger, which sort of guaranteed that we would at least have a few similar interests right off the bat. To anyone in Seattle I highly recommend it.

megablast• 16 years ago

What, that you both live in Seattle and you are Strangers?

I think this is the way to go, big sites attract lots of strange people. Also, from what I have heard, paying sites have better clientele than the free sites, which makes sense, but I have not been game to actually pay for it.

ambulatorybird• 16 years ago

I agree wiht a lot of his points. I think people do tend to be more superficial or picky when evaluating profiles, because the photos are really the only thing to go on -- you can't get a sense of a person's body language or speaking style online, and textual data only goes so far. And I found the actual "first dates" to be stressful because they're more like interviews for dates rather than real dates -- much of the spontaneity and chemistry of meeting a person for the first time is gone. Finally, as a non-white male, the odds online are somewhat stacked against me, which is discouraging.

I'm intrigued by the guy's idea about creating interactive virtual spaces for dating, rather than searching through textual profiles. I.e., put people together in a rich, dynamic environment, let them observe the complexity of each other's interactions, and they can gravitate toward one another on that basis. Heck, it doesn't even have to be virtual -- you could launch something like a matchmaking amusement park.

potatolicious4• 16 years ago

I've thought for a long time that the removal of profiles (that are viewable by the other party) is pretty much the key that will make online dating actually work.

People are far too picky, and reject far too many people they would otherwise get along with famously in real life - I've noticed this pattern in myself also. Profiles suck at describing people, not to mention their compatibility with you - yet they have this air of authority and legitimacy about them.

If we had a decent matchmaking service that wasn't just a complete crapshoot (i.e., high-scoring matches are actually good matches), I'd say a blind-date system may in fact work better than what we've got now - get people out there and interacting in real life as opposed to a terminal with a bunch of droll readouts of vital statistics.

Goosey2• 16 years ago

This blind date idea is really what interests me. I think profiles create two issues beyond the ones you already pointed out. I am pulling these examples from my experience on OkCupid.

1 - People don't give fully honest answers to personality questions. Instead it seems people craft a personality they think will either get them the most results or get the the specific results they are looking for. So not only the profile, but also the questions become gamed due to the 'aggressive filtering' people do.

2 - People spend obsessive amounts of time crafting their profile, which actually gets read, and very little time answering personality questions, which don't. Assuming the personality question formula is more reliable for matching than making decisions based on someone's profile writing skills, this reverses the emphasis.

I think a basic system like OkCupid's could work for matching. I like the way you both give your answer and you give the answer you want your mate to have. It's intuitive and allows for complex dynamics like a submissive person seeking a dominant person. But the profile viewing/filtering gets in the way of the legitimacy. If it was a blind-date popcorn machine I think it would work a lot better (and be a lot more fun!)

hapless• 16 years ago

A blind date system would suffer from the adverse selection problem. As long as any other system exists, the blind date system would be disproportionately used by predators and other undesirables who find it disproportionately helpful.

Worse, in this case, the adverse selection problem builds on itself. Over time, "normal" users would be driven out until only problematic candidates remained.

psyklic2• 16 years ago

I've done quite a bit of online dating. It is very difficult to figure out someone's personality from profiles on dating sites. However, I can figure out personality VERY well (and hence whether we'd click) from someone's Facebook profile, if they are an active user.

It's things like -- what kind of people do they hang out with? Who posts on their wall and what do they say? How do they talk with their friends? What type of profile pictures do they post? What do they do with friends? etc. Some people say that Facebook is TMI for dating (or that it's too much personal info to give out before meeting), but it has helped me avoid many awkward first dates!

asdflkj• 16 years ago

A matchmaking amusement park is also called a bar.

klipt5• 16 years ago

But some people don't like alcohol.

fairlyodd• 16 years ago

While I agree with some of what he says, I still think he discredits online dating sites far too much. Being single in a city (SF) I moved into recently, I've tried both online & offline, and I'd say I'm more satisfied with my dates that came out of the online one. The city is full of singles, but most singles are crowded in bars, and that is not the most conducive environment to find someone for a meaningful relationship. Also, most past attempts have been crapshoot, where I end up conversing with girls that are either superficial, uninteresting, have nothing in common, committed, married (they want to 'network') etc. No real success with the bar scene so far except for a phonebook harder to navigate, and a really attractive girl that also told me she was institutionalized once, and that her parents are cons.

On a paid online dating site (for eg: match.com), you know that the people are there because they really are looking for a relationship (and that they care enough to pony up ridiculous money for the site). You get a sense of a person by various things that they say about themselves, and you only initiate conversations with ones that you'd be interested in. Though much of the Ariely discrediting is with the search attributes, those open-ended questions offer a peek into how the person views himself/herself. If you move beyond the superficiality, there is definitely a good chance there. I've been on a dates with people I met online, and I do feel that there was better chemistry on these dates rather than the offline ones.

rokhayakebe• 16 years ago

I have started to use an online dating site for the first time about 4-6 weeks ago. It is hard work. It's like having a mini part time job.

Advice for startups in this space. Cut your features to the following: Like + Email. If I LIKE someone (judging by the looks), then show me the basic info. If I LIKE the basic info, they get a notification and if they LIKE me then that's it. Let us email each other from OUR OWN client. So I email user345@datingsite.com and you route the email a la Craigslist. Simple as that. Let us take it further.

Advice to guys. My first 2 weeks I was pinging everyone I was attracted to. That did not work (for me). It's when I just kick back and decide to wait that I realized it's mostly the women who choose in this game. Also if someone contacts the conversation is usually much easier. My 2 newbie cents.

kadavy4• 16 years ago

You're right about the women doing the choosing. There was a study about how when women did the approaching in speed-dating, they became more interested. (PDF: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://faculty.wcas.north...) So you're at an advantage if they make the first move.

So, online, just getting into their sphere of awareness by viewing their profile can help elicit a wink (and using a call-to-action in your profile): http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-whos-viewed-me/

When you do finally send a message, it's best to keep it short, specific, and include ONE question: http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/

amichail2• 16 years ago

Maybe social news sites such as reddit could double as online dating sites.

The focus would be on intellectual debate, rather than on more superficial things.

hugh36• 16 years ago

Do you think "interestingness of intellectual debates" is the most important quality of a partner?

amichail2• 16 years ago

It's probably a better starting point than more superficial things.

WilliamLP7• 16 years ago

I had my first dating experiences in life online, and then I met a couple of girls "normally". (Relationships are few and far between for me, and I have to work at getting one and it takes a year or two and finding one is by far the hardest problem I've ever had to solve in my life).

I'm trying online again, and the contrast is extremely stark. There is nothing in any other experience in life that has made me think of myself as an unwanted commodity item quite so much as this. As a man in my thirties who is below average in height (5'8) I fight against about 25% to 75% numbers, and the women seem almost universally to be working extra carefully to exclude me and almost always come across as extremely entitled, both in written and in unwritten ways. And I can't blame them for it! They just understand the economics of scarcity, apparently. Despite being reasonably successful in life and being in the best physical shape I've ever been (10% bodyfat or so, can barely see my abs, can bench press 185 for 8 reps at bodyweight of 155), I seem completely uninteresting to women in a nearly universal way without much I can do to change this.

There are no doubt some men who succeed fantastically in this environment, but it seems that for someone like me to do so, I would need to, very much, be conscious of playing the game and pretty much doing anything but presenting an unashamed and straightforward version of self-expression. Since I consider it to be the core of my character to neither accept or deal out bullshit from anyone, but to seek the direct truth, this is a problem.

This is in contrast to where I've actually had success with women in the past - amateur classical singing and opera. There the population is about 75% women, with many of the men being gay. There, I can get a taste of what dating is like for the rest of the world - I didn't have to play some stupid hyper-masculinized pursuer who throws semi-sincere interest at a hundred women until one of them returns a peep, but situations actually can develop somewhat symmetrically and organically. Clearly the answer for me is to get back into a world like that, despite not being very interested anymore for any other reason. (My passion these days is programming and development.)

Anyway, this turned into a big rant, but I've been single for a year, face the prospect of a few more, and it does get to me.

bokonist3• 16 years ago

There are no doubt some men who succeed fantastically in this environment, but it seems that for someone like me to do so, I would need to, very much, be conscious of playing the game and pretty much doing anything but presenting an unashamed and straightforward version of self-expression. Since I consider it to be the core of my character to neither accept or deal out bullshit from anyone, but to seek the direct truth, this is a problem.

If you have attitude that you're not going to make any changes to yourself in order to land women, than you're not going to land women. And why should women want to date you if your not willing to make the step?

Women don't want direct and straightforward. They want charm, mystery, excitement. For one trite example, When I'm commenting on some nerdy web forum, and my girlfriend asks me what I'm doing, I don't say, "I'm chatting on a web forum." I say, "I'm engaging in correspondence" and paint the air of some sophisticated 19th century aristocrat. Or I say, "the same thing I do every night, sweetie, try and take over the world". When you can learn to dress up the mundane aspects of life with fun and charm, you'll find women enjoy being around you a lot more.

I used to think "game" was just something for cad's and those who wanted only numbers and notches. But even the most cultured, educated, women wants to be charmed, she wants that psychologically dominant rogue to game her. If you want a great, long term affectionate companion, you need to develop both the personal rapport and shared interests, but also the romantic game/charm that makes her tingle for you.

WilliamLP7• 16 years ago

> If you have attitude that you're not going to make any changes to yourself in order to land women, than you're not going to land women.

I know! Such would be the definition of insanity and all that. That's why my future plans involve making the best of the strengths and weaknesses I have and who I am, who is someone who refuses to strive to be anybody but the person of my dreams. Women don't like me and I'll live.

> Women don't want direct and straightforward. They want charm, mystery, excitement.

I know that too. I've read the SS literature and heard Ross Jeffries tapes. The shit works. I don't like people who use it and it's not for me. Bullshit I can detect disgusts me, in both genders. I know the arguments quite well and I know human nature quite well. When you're learning a foreign language, you don't say "Speaking French isn't me" you make the sounds that seem weird at first. However, feeling like I need to spend my whole life making all my conversations with women crafted according to some stupid shit I don't actually feel isn't worth it for me. Yes I'm bitter, and I don't even rant all the time, just in this thread:)

> you need to develop both the personal rapport and shared interests, but also the romantic game/charm that makes her tingle for you.

Yes I know. But I say no to this, and the anger at the fact that the person of my dreams isn't good enough for a woman will drive me to more success, on my own terms.

greendestiny• 16 years ago

Actually I think you're missing the point. Certainly he could actively engage in strategies that work in online dating, and doing so would increase his chances of success in getting dates through online dating sites. His point is that in doing so he plays a very different game to other dating environments - like amateur opera - and that the whole game is unpleasant and unappealing to him. That's pretty much the point of the original video as well.

Self depreciation is actually quite charming - but I really doubt it would work in online dating. So if I was actually trying to give WilliamLP dating advice, it would be to find avenues more suited to his talents. But if we're discussing online dating I think I'd say the things it emphasizes and encourages are contrary to the things that find good compatible relationships.

MrFoof• 16 years ago

"I would need to, very much, be conscious of playing the game and pretty much doing anything but presenting an unashamed and straightforward version of self-expression."

Bingo. You nailed it, and I can say that is the mindset you need.

I'm the same height. Similar build (actually a bit thinner). Yet younger. Friends say I'm anything but unattractive, yet the reality is I've always been single.

I took a crack at things a few months ago and rather than be straightforward, I use Hugh Gallagher's "Essay 3A" as inspiration for my profile. The entire thing was nothing short of a farce. I couldn't of taken it any less seriously aside from the fact that it was genuinely funny.

I received eighteen first contacts within the first week. This is nothing new. Usually I get annoyed, put up something ridiculous, and in come the results. Or if I do contact someone, I write something incredibly brief or incredibly goofy and then start to get replies.

Did any of them pan out this time? No. Ultimately it resulted in three different dates all of which went bad enough to turn me off of dating for another year. However my point is women don't care for straight-forwardness. At all.

Goladus2• 16 years ago

My first recommendation is to try creating social situations yourself. Instead of spending time in the gym working on your bench press, plan a bike trip or a hike and invite friends. Have dinner parties at your house. Basically: create an environment that a woman would like anyway, whether you were there or not, and invite her into it.

That being said, if you are in the Boston area and are interested in getting back into classical singing and opera I can probably help out.

keefe• 16 years ago

How many people do you talk to? It can take hundreds of attempted contacts to hit one winner.

>without much I can do to change this.

Dude, you're fit. Many, many women will be down with this. If you're not extremely ugly, it's behavioral so this just means it's time for introspection.

You don't have to play the game, you have to avoid obviously offensive things, contact a lot of people and be VERY selective about who you waste your time on. You could spend your whole life trying to chat up 18-22 yo 8-10 looks girls or with lots of correspondence to someone you don't really like, that doesn't mean it's a solid idea (or that you are doing this, just an example)

bootload• 16 years ago

"... This is in contrast to where I've actually had success with women in the past - amateur classical singing and opera. There the population is about 75% women, with many of the men being gay. There, I can get a taste of what dating is like for the rest of the world ..."

This is a very accurate observation. I remember reading a news article, "So You Think You Can Cancel Me?" ~ http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/10/2815250.htm this year making the same claim.

"... Rock Eisteddfod didn't just provide emasculated nerds with an alternative to the Jock Eisteddfod that is competitive sport. It meant for a few blissful hours each week, we had the girls to ourselves. Girls who would dance. In tights. To a soundtrack of Jamiroquai. ..."

k7d• 16 years ago

Online dating can work very well (it has worked for me) but be patient. It will take time until you really get it. Practice, practice, practice. Don't give up if you have no luck right away. There are subtle communication aspects that you can learn as you go, and they make all the difference.

And keep away from specialized dating sites. Go with Facebook or any other kind of communication platform that are not invented exclusively for dating. People are just much more natural there. With some practise you can fairly easy figure out if there's a date potential just by looking at a profile.

klipt5• 16 years ago

Isn't it considered creepy to contact people on Facebook without knowing them in real life?

lsc2• 16 years ago

I think 95% of 'game' is simply to ask as many women as possible, and to not get discouraged when you get shot down. (personally, I think most of the effectiveness of the 'fast seduction' crap is that it gives you something to focus on besides getting shot down.)

Everyone wants something different, and there really is a strong 'right place at the right time' component. A woman who would have rejected you last night might be receptive tonight, etc..

This works, if you just want to get laid. My experience with on line dating was that you needed to differentiate yourself through better writing (and through writing personalized to the profile) and to lower your standards some. (let's be real here. the 'selection pressure' on line is even stronger than real life. You're competing against a hoard of lonely men, all of whom can lie about their stats. So unless you are lying (which really doesn't work to well once you meet) you aren't going to be able to compete on statistics.

But really, I think when looking for a 'real relationship' most of the 'pick up spots' are disproportionately loaded with people who are unable or unwilling to sustain a long-term relationship. I mean, that's fine if you are just looking to get laid; but I don't think it's a great filter to use when looking for a relationship.

potatolicious4• 16 years ago

Agreed, but I think you're missing something: there doesn't need to be two extremes here. There are more places to meet women than online and nightclubs.

Selection pressure is stronger online due to mere demographic differences alone - but there honestly are more places than online.

tome2• 16 years ago

Interesting. I had wondered myself whether a large part of the success of "seduction techniques" is that the man using them can blame failure on his incorrect applicatino of the technique, rather than on something intrinsic to himself.

joubert• 16 years ago

Have you tried speed dating?

DennisP2• 16 years ago

Have you tried the free dating sites, like plentyoffish?

I ask because I read an article recently pointing out the economics of paid dating sites, and how it leads nearly every male to have the experience you described.

Couldn't find the link again but I think it went something like this: people sign up for the "free" offer, and their profile goes up. But they can't respond until they pay. So you ping a few people, and in a lot of cases don't get a response because they haven't paid yet (but the site doesn't tell you that). Then you ping a few more. As time passes and you broaden your scope, you're no longer sending carefully crafted, personal messages, you're using a shotgun approach. (Or at least, most guys are.)

Meanwhile, the women aren't initiating usually, they're letting the guys come to them. Since the guys are all shotgunning, the women are getting flooded. If they're even reading all their messages, they clicking through fast looking for any excuse to reject each one and move on to the next.

billmcneale2• 16 years ago

One thing that's positive about online dating is that it takes away a lot of the mysterious parameters.

Mysterious parameters: you meet a girl (or guy, but let's say girl) at a party, hit it off, exchange phone numbers, call a few days later a get the cold shoulder. Or you go on one or two dates, things still going well and then you never hear back from that person.

What probably happened: she had a hang up, she wasn't ready, she met someone else, she wasn't really looking, she was just interested in a few free meals, she was set up by friends but she wasn't really into it, etc...

The advantage of online dating is that people who commit to it are usually a bit more ready to get involved with someone else. I found that there is less playing game and more straight-to-the-point "I'm looking for someone, so are you, let's see if this can work".

kadavy4• 16 years ago

Online Dating is Unsatisfying because people suck at communicating.

They need to write good profiles by not talking about themselves so much: http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-write-an-online...

They need to write clear and compelling opening messages: http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/

They need to speak in specifics to get a conversation flowing: http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/conversation-nuggets-i...

WilliamLP7• 16 years ago

It's posts like this that make think "forget women". I mean seriously. I would want a relationship where I can be myself, and don't have to craft every bit of what I say according to some stupid protocol when it annoys the fuck out of me to see other people following when I can tell they're not being who they want but just following the rules. Yes I'm single, yes I have been for a long time, yes I will be for a long time further, most likely.

kadavy4• 16 years ago

The "protocol" isn't really for the sake of being someone other than yourself - it's for letting your personality be displayed through the limitations of the medium.

Goladus2• 16 years ago

Excellent interview. Yes, he mostly ignores the people who've had success, but I don't think it really detracts much from the overall point. I've had some success with online dating but I agree that it's generally an unsatisfying experience much the way he describes it. (3-6 hours of work per cup of coffee pretty much nails it).

The points about sharing experience are accurate, except that I would focus in particular on shared experiences with multiple people at once. A big weakness in online dating is that it's tends to be a series of one-on-one interactions. Unless one of you is really good at seducing strangers, and does it right away, it's going to be hard to sustain those one-on-one interactions long enough to turn into a relationship.

At least one person has to take the step to integrate into the other's social network, and it has to happen quickly, or else it's not likely to go anywhere. The way offline dating tends to work is that you meet someone in a social situation. You interact with them for a few moments at a time, with frequent breaks while you each socialize with other people. You have opportunities to observe the person discreetly as well as interact with them. You send each other signals and at some point you find some privacy and get more serious.

A dating site that encouraged that sort of thing might be more successful. (okcupid tries to encourage a variety of behaviors but ultimately their design still winds up facilitating the one-on-one chat -> date paradigm)

AaronM• 16 years ago

I stopped reading this after the first paragraph. Who puts their article in a small 5x5 inch box?

tome2• 16 years ago

It's not an article. It's the transcript of the video.

jasonlotito2• 16 years ago

Choosing PHP over Python, Perl, and ASP.

Countless hours on #php.

Meeting and talking with a girl I met on #php for hours on end on the phone.

"Dating" online.

Meeting 2 months after we started "dating".

Me moving to another country 3 months after that.

Marrying 6 years later.

Happily married and expecting our second child later this month. =)

mcantor• 16 years ago

You met your love based on a niche common interest/activity--programming in PHP--as opposed to a broad common activity--online dating. Not trying to trivialize anything you said... your story is completely awesome, actually. I just want to point out that even though what you did technically qualifies as "online dating," it's very different from the kind of online dating criticized in this interview!

jasonlotito2• 16 years ago

Oh, I know. However, it's the article and headline that is at fault. Online dating sites are one thing. Meeting online is a completely different thing. =)

motters• 16 years ago

Online dating is difficult if, like me, you generally dislike superficiality and find the prospect of turning yourself into a sales & marketing guy or a snake oil salesman terrifying.

Dan Ariely on why online dating is so unsatisfying

Related Stories