Collaborative filtering doesn't work for us
This is Chatroulette. Burn the matchmaking algorithms and keep it true random?For example, if every dating site in existence did this the world would be a better place. Instead, we typically see layers of opaque algorithmic shit governing human interaction. The platform's interests are then in effect prioritized, not the user's.Did anyone ever stop and think: "Is aggressively matching what we believe to be compatible or like-minded people actually a good thing for society? Is it possible that's actually a pretty terrible thing? Do we even know?"There's a certain beauty to true randomness in a matchmaking context. It's a fair playing field for everyone. You start using highly imperfect and frankly arbitrary algorithms to govern who matches with who, and suddenly certain people aren't going to meet certain people for reasons they're probably not even aware of."Hey, this person could have been your significant other or best friend, but you never met them because some engineers at some tech company decided to get fancy. Fuck you." Or, in so many dating app cases: fancy and greedy.Every time these algorithms are employed, there's always people that fall into the cracks; the dead zones. There they languish. Perhaps months or years later the algorithm is adjusted and affords them a reprieve. Perhaps never.---This isn't meant to be an indictment of Chatroulette. On the contrary, good on them for reporting negative results. Obviously some filtering must be done for a myriad of reasons, such as curbing abuse. Their stated mission is even to match people "At random." They've thought about this problem a lot more than I have.That said, I thoroughly believe the road to hell is paved by matching users based on metrics such as projected compatibility or similar interests.