Here is the Tinder-O-Matic in action: Dating sites are more likely to work if people are who they say they are. To help avoid those who stretch — or airbrush — the truth, online dating site Zoosk last month introduced a new feature to confirm the authenticity of members’ profile pictures.
But those who signed up tend to come from metropolitan areas, earn 0,000-plus a year and have an average age of 49.Unlike apps such as Tinder, Grindr and Blendr, e Harmony’s 29 different dimensions — its famous and parodied algorithms created by founder Neil Clark Warren, a clinical psychologist — cover personality and character rather than chemistry or physical attractiveness.He was 100% upfront about his “Tinder-O-Matic” as an experiment and he says it’s less invasive than software hacks like “Tinder Auto Liker,” which claims to do the same thing.There is one obvious flaw for those who want to invent their own version: Sink’s robotic finger will like everyone. (44 percent) lie on their profiles, according to a survey by global research company Opinion Matters.On Tinder, a swipe to the left means you’re not interested and a swipe to the right means you like the person; if they “right-swipe” you back, it’s a match. He also wanted to test out his robotic invention — a mechanical finger that held a conductive pen. “Although,” he adds, “I’m not sure how many of those were robotic fingers.” He received about 70 messages from girls within a 100-mile radius, but he only replied to one girl who worked in engineering.
He called it the “Tinder-O-Matic,” which “likes” a new profile every 4 seconds, or 900 likes an hour. “I thought she might get a kick out of the project,” he says.But rival sites say algorithms are little more than marketing and physical attraction is the most important thing.“The very idea that we can create algorithms designed by programmers to cheat this great mystery is, well, just plain silly,” Hodge says.“So we don’t really know when the algorithm has worked.That will change soon, with the rise of mobile and wearable computing.Making sense of dating algorithms is a virgin science and is still more miss than hit, says Mark Brooks, a dating-industry analyst and the editor of Online Personals Watch.