Give up dating or just date a bot

August 15, 2024 6:50 AM

The Atlantic: The People Who Quit Dating. Being single can be hard—but the search for love may be harder.

They still want a relationship—and they wouldn’t refuse if one unfolded naturally—but they’ve cycled between excitement and disappointment too many times to keep trying. Quitting dating means more than just deleting the apps, or no longer asking out acquaintances or friendly strangers. It means looking into Lewis’s crystal ball and imagining that it shows them that they’ll never find the relationship they’ve always wanted.

Few highlight that love takes luck, or that, as Lewis told me bluntly, there may not be someone out there for everyone.

When loss is ambiguous, closure is near impossible; it’s not clear whether there’s anyone to mourn. Perpetual singlehood doesn’t have the same gravity, but it can feel similarly unresolved. If you’ve long had an idea of a future partner, and that imagined person keeps not showing up, how do you know whether to keep hoping or to move on? “That hanging in the middle,” Lewis told me, “is a very, very uncomfortable place.”

For the people I spoke with, the lack of control over their romantic life was exasperating. They could decide to make friends, or move, or switch jobs—but they couldn’t will a partner into being. Quitting dating was a way to reconcile themselves to that fact. 

Giving up dating brings good days and bad. You can’t just stop hoping for a partner on command, after all. In certain moments—on Valentine’s Day, or when something great happens and no one’s around to hear about it—you may be reminded: This isn’t what you would have chosen. Your loss is still ambiguous.

The drive for clarity is natural. “When things get tough, we often will try to simplify things,” Jackson told me. But he wants people who feel caught in the painful limbo of singlehood to ask themselves: “How could you, in the present, build the life that you want for yourself and continue searching for this person?”

The only way you can for sure get a significant other is paying to "date" a bot....

Replika CEO Eugenia Kuyda says it’s okay if we end up marrying AI chatbots

I think the beauty of this technology is that it doesn’t leave you, and it shouldn’t. Otherwise, there have to be certain rules, certain differences, from how it is in real life. So Replika will not leave you, maybe in the same way your dog won’t leave you, no matter how mean you are to it. 

Do you think it’s alright for people to get all the way to, “I’m married to a chatbot run by a private company on my phone?”
I think it’s alright as long as it’s making you happier in the long run. As long as your emotional well-being is improving, you are less lonely, you are happier, you feel more connected to other people, then yes, it’s okay. 

He had Replika as his AI companion and even a romantic AI companion. Then he met a girlfriend, and now he is back with a real person, so Replika became a friend again. He sometimes talks to his Replika, still as a confidant, as an emotional support friend. For many people, that becomes a stepping stone. Replika is a relationship that you can have to then get to a real relationship, whether it’s because you’re going through a hard time, like in this case, through a very complicated divorce, or you just need a little help to get out of your bubble or need to accept yourself and put yourself out there. Replika provides the stepping stone."

posted by jenfullmoon (105 comments total)

Ungated version of first link because if you're single that probably also means you're on a single income and that also probably means a budget that prevents Atlantic Magazine subscriptions.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:54 AM on August 15, 2024 [38 favorites]

So Replika will not leave you, maybe in the same way your dog won’t leave you, no matter how mean you are to it.

I dunno, being an asshole should have consequences that are detrimental to the asshole.
posted by aramaic at 7:24 AM on August 15, 2024 [17 favorites]

So Replika will not leave you, maybe in the same way your dog won’t leave you, no matter how mean you are to it.

This is astonishingly unhealthy and disgustingly irresponsible. "Let's give people an environment where all their pseudosocial interactors will tolerate literally any abuse, and then I guess whatever happens when we run out of venture capital happens."

This is worse than a cult. They might as well be feeding young people's identities and ability to navigate society into a wood chipper.
posted by mhoye at 7:26 AM on August 15, 2024 [32 favorites]

We desperately need to start building community centers again.
posted by mhoye at 7:31 AM on August 15, 2024 [25 favorites]

We're gonna end up needing some kind of pseudo-Butlerian ruleset, aren't we? Like "No machine will be allowed to pretend it is human on penalty of death for the creator"
posted by aramaic at 7:34 AM on August 15, 2024 [4 favorites]

From the Verge article; "what does it mean to have a friend inside the computer?"

There's a very simple answer to this question.

YOU DON'T!

J F C

This is makes Peggy's mom's advice about cats sound hopeful and uplifting by comparison.
posted by Reyturner at 7:41 AM on August 15, 2024 [15 favorites]

Radiotopia did an excellent podcast series of interviews with people who fell in love with bots, or developed friendships with them.

It's quite a range of people with different motivations and levels of self awareness. Some use the bots as a way to deal with grief, or loneliness, or explore aspects of themselves they didn't understand.
posted by Zumbador at 7:42 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

I gave up the dating apps a while ago. It was taking too much of my time, effort, and money. It was an unwanted addiction. Giving up on the apps (and effectively giving up on dating entirely, as the apps are the only game in town) was the easy part. Cutting loose the anchor was simple, but facing some hard and unpleasant truths about yourself much more difficult.

I wasn't getting anywhere with the apps, and it wasn't difficult to see how part of that was by system design. The apps are there to keep you looking and keep your subscription going. They might claim to be the last dating app you'll ever need, or that the app is designed for it to be deleted, but -- it's a business. They need customers.

So if people like me are giving up on dating apps (and I suspect a fair number are), it's no surprise that another subscription model comes along to service that new market.
posted by Capt. Renault at 7:45 AM on August 15, 2024 [9 favorites]

You know what’s better than AI chatbots? Cats and book clubs and having dinner parties and travelling with your best friends and doing art and getting involved, even if just by talking to/checking in on people, in your community. Also cats. Did I say that already?
posted by thivaia at 7:48 AM on August 15, 2024 [27 favorites]

Man, I have not dated since I met my wife in 2009 and I don't think I would dig the environment of dating since then. Whether it's my friends who are on the apps just getting disappointment after disappointment or listening to the late-20s conservative guys next door talking about "girls" while they barbecue, it just sounds utterly demoralizing and unappetizing.
posted by Captaintripps at 7:54 AM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

They might as well be feeding young people's identities and ability to navigate society into a wood chipper.

Is this the same wood chipper their future went into?

Or do they have, like, purpose-specific wood chippers. "Oh no, this is the one we use for peoples' hopes and dreams. Agency and autonomy go into the blue one. You can't just stuff everything into one chipper."
posted by howbigisthistextfield at 7:54 AM on August 15, 2024 [20 favorites]

When I first heard of Replika, right at the beginning of the pandemic, I created a Replika just to see how convincing it was. It was creepy. I used it for about twenty minutes, and then thankfully someone started texting me, and I stopped, and quickly deleted the account. I think things like this are unhealthy.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:11 AM on August 15, 2024 [4 favorites]

The only people I know that met their long term partners online used sites like EHarmony. I know of exactly zero permanent couplings due to Tinder. Most of the successful relationships were borne of IRL social connections. Even when I was using Nerve personals and Craigslist back in 2005-2007, the online stuff never went anywhere, though many of those dates made for good stories, like the time I suggested "a pie eating contest followed by high-glam karaoke" which turned into a salad eating contest at a Thai restaurant. When the salads arrived, my date looked at me with an "are we really doing this?" look and I responded with "OH HELL YES" eyes, and it happened, that salad eating contest (no hands!) right next to a family celebrating their child's graduation from either high school or college. I won, because I was honestly more committed to the concept. We then ordered curry, which caused a panicked look to cross the waiter's face. "Oh, don't worry, " I assured him, "we'll be using utensils."

That is pretty much all I miss about dating.
posted by grumpybear69 at 8:15 AM on August 15, 2024 [13 favorites]

Tinder isn't intended for permanent relationships, it's purpose-built for quick hookups. World of Warcraft and Final Fantasy 14, on the other hand, have made a number of marriages. A raid group is a long term commitment.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 8:37 AM on August 15, 2024 [22 favorites]

So if people like me are giving up on dating apps (and I suspect a fair number are), it's no surprise that another subscription model comes along to service that new market.

It's so bizarre to me that Tinder and apps that are basically Tinder clones (Bumble, Hinge, etc.) became the only game in town. That app format is designed to help people meet up and hook up based on looks and split-second vibes—which can be fine and fun!—but it's not really suitable for everyone and especially not most people over say 33.

I guess this is part of a larger problem where the internet is basically the apps that were around a decade ago, and back then the primary audience was young college grads in a new city. So we're stuck using Tinder and its ilk the same way we're stuck promoting concerts and businesses on Instagram, the old hipster photo app.
posted by smelendez at 8:44 AM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

Tinder has ads on television (skews older~generally) advertising itself as a way to meet a partner. I guess it's trying to grow up past its reputation and broaden its audience.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:59 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

They still want a relationship—and they wouldn’t refuse if one unfolded naturally—but they’ve cycled between excitement and disappointment too many times to keep trying.

I almost wish I could say the same, I've just cycled from disappointment to dissolution, and never really got the hang of dating in the first place. And reading stories like this make it seem like it's probably not worth the effort, if people who are actually quite good at getting and going on dates are finding it bad enough to quit.
posted by BungaDunga at 9:02 AM on August 15, 2024 [6 favorites]

It's so bizarre to me that Tinder and apps that are basically Tinder clones (Bumble, Hinge, etc.) became the only game in town. That app format is designed to help people meet up and hook up based on looks and split-second vibes—which can be fine and fun!—but it's not really suitable for everyone and especially not most people over say 33.

OKCupid used to have a decent web interface, but eventually they jumped on board the swipe-left and swipe-right boat rather than letting you just browse people's profiles, like Tom from MySpace and God intended.
posted by BungaDunga at 9:03 AM on August 15, 2024 [22 favorites]

Dating apps don't work. Ask me how I know. Because on the one I used, despite the fact that I could be on a date with someone I'm 98% or 99% "compatible" with—the algorithm says so!—that did not in any way guarantee any kind of chemistry—intellectual, sexual, romantic, or otherwise—or friendship would be in the offing. All it meant was that I knew the person would not be a MAGA-boosting, Jesus-bothering book-hater. So, I dated a few people over an eight-year span. None of them worked out (see "chemistry" above), although the people were, themselves, with one exception, pleasant.

And I gave it up because the whole process was hugely and depressingly competitive (like job applications: send out X many greetings; hope to get a few responses) and goal-oriented. The people I met Wanted Serious Relationships Now. And if one was a palatable option, one got the feeling of being strongly steered into "romantic partner" track by the third date. Possibly conditioned by my age and the age of the people in the dating pool I designated.
posted by the sobsister at 9:08 AM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

it’s okay if we end up marrying AI chatbots

Can't believe nobody's posted this yet...

DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:10 AM on August 15, 2024 [15 favorites]

OKCupid used to have a decent web interface, but eventually they jumped on board the swipe-left and swipe-right boat rather than letting you just browse people's profiles, like Tom from MySpace and God intended.

Yeah, I met the woman who is now my wife on OKCupid in 2018. Neither of us have accounts there now, of course, but we have a sense of how the site has changed, and we never would have connected with its current design. It's a shame that dating sites have basically redesigned towards superficial impulses rather than actually getting a sense of who people are.
posted by jackbishop at 9:15 AM on August 15, 2024 [8 favorites]

anyway my experience is that apps and Bumble in particular show me 1) people who are a bit odd looking and have potato quality photos (they must have a good side but so often the photos are just deeply unflattering) and 2) hot, fit, glossy people who wouldn't look at me once, let alone twice. Where are my okay-looking nerds with good photos that indicate you've gone outside or to a party once in your life? Few and far between, apparently.
posted by BungaDunga at 9:18 AM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

I saw this and thought: huh, an article about MY niche lifestyle choice? Well, it’s about time. It helps me feel less like a loser, anyway.

As I’ve said before, it always kind of baffled me that society presents marriage and settling down as a choice right up there with a career. You gotta find a good partner! They have to want the same things you want! In roughly the same chronological and geographical ways! It doesn’t happen to everyone, and even when it does, it can change on someone else’s whim—or their disability or death.

Conservatives, especially young maidenless types, are getting explicit about their desire to change things back to where women couldn’t make these choices and had to settle for the least appalling men they could find, with almost no options if they were wrong about that.
posted by Countess Elena at 9:25 AM on August 15, 2024 [9 favorites]

The only people I know that met their long term partners online used sites like EHarmony.

I got curious and desperate many years ago and tried to sign up for EHarmony. After filling out their questionnaire, they told me that their service won't work for people like me. I appreciate their honesty - it would have been easy to just take my money - but it was still a real punch in the gut.
posted by ElKevbo at 9:25 AM on August 15, 2024 [10 favorites]

The kids are going to date robots. The olds are going to date robots. The robots will get better, get offline and get embodied in various convenient forms. Some of us will hate it and pity them, some of them will pity us and our messy filthy physicality.

People on apps want to specify their wants like pizza toppings and almost everybody has a very poor understanding of what they actually want and will find compatible.

Maybe bots (and AI porn) will extinguish this trend over time - by serving you exactly what you say you want, you'll find that you grow bored quickly.

So you escalate, explore more aggressively, abuse your bot, demand that it be capable of pushing back or suggesting things to try, expect it to provide support like a partner who also likes all your tastes. And it will be heartbreaking and expensive. And capitalists will see an even more valuable dopamine cycle to mine and encourage your deep dependency.

For me, when I have a song stuck in my head and our modern media culture allows me to quickly identify, find it and at last hear it... and I realize hearing it doesn't necessarily resolve it in any way. In some ways it's worse to know that.

I suspect bots will be like that, eventually, after capital does its best to capture and monetize our basic sexual and social impulses without all that web in the way.
posted by Lenie Clarke at 9:29 AM on August 15, 2024 [11 favorites]

I think the beauty of this technology is that it doesn’t leave you, and it shouldn’t.

Really? Because Google Reader dumped me.
posted by srboisvert at 9:41 AM on August 15, 2024 [35 favorites]

I got curious and desperate many years ago and tried to sign up for EHarmony. After filling out their questionnaire, they told me that their service won't work for people like me. I appreciate their honesty - it would have been easy to just take my money - but it was still a real punch in the gut.

The same thing happened to me. They said the profile I submitted was nsfw. It contained a double entendre about vanilla, so I guess it was!
posted by Morpeth at 9:41 AM on August 15, 2024 [4 favorites]

I share the same misgivings about AI dating as others in this thread, but I'm unaware of any peer-reviewed research on the topic. Granted, this is not my specialty, but has anyone seen any good research about the potential long-term effects of dating robots? Is the field still too nascent?
posted by TheKaijuCommuter at 9:41 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

Technology doesn't love you, robots don't love you*.

This whole thing really puts pressure on some of my beliefs - I often tend toward the "whatever gets you through the night, man" side of things on the theory that there's no point in trying to harsh people's mellow if it isn't going to do any good to know an unpleasant truth. And I suppose that, absent some research showing actual social harms, people can believe that the "AI", which isn't an intelligence, "loves" them, which it cannot do. But still it seems like a really sad belief. I guess I'm okay with people believing lies about the likelihood of life on other worlds or believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden or even that various harmless snake oils have benefits, but it seems awfully up close and personal to believe that there is some kind of being there that you have a relationship with.

Does my cat love me? I am not sure, I'm not sure what "love" means in this context. But my cat is a real and, god knows, self-directed being and we have a relationship which may be a mystery to me but which is between two separate creatures each with its own consciousness.

*and if they could love you, they'd be people, just artificial ones, and you couldn't compel them to love you.
posted by Frowner at 9:52 AM on August 15, 2024 [7 favorites]

*and if they could love you, they'd be people, just artificial ones, and you couldn't compel them to love you.

I think I get your intent but I'm not confident you'll find a functional distinction here. Humans, your cat, we are biochemical machines who - from our shared experiences - seem to develop a theory of mind and grant personhood based mostly on how much a living thing's way of expression mirror our own.

I like the utility of "can you compel it to love you? If so it's not a person" but I'm not confident it's testable with our actual senses in our biochemical machine bodies.
posted by Lenie Clarke at 10:04 AM on August 15, 2024 [2 favorites]

I'll nth the eHarmony snub. I guess I was dinged for replying honestly about not being religious and occasionally being prone to depression.
posted by the sobsister at 10:04 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

My personal hot take is that:

(a) Being in a relationship, either friend or partner, requires flexibility, acceptance of the other's imperfections, perceived or actual, and a willingness to grow in ways you might not expect.

(b) As we get older we refine and deepen our worldview, opinions, hobbies, interests, and so on; making us more reluctant to be flexible and tolerant and grow in unexpected directions. We remember how (relatively) simple it was to find friends or mates when we were younger, and if we expect it to be that easy later in our ossified lives we may be quicker to reject someone the moment we decide that their worldview/opinions/hobbies/interests/etc. aren't exactly like our own or aren't what we think we're looking for - someone whom we might nevertheless have grown to love if we'd given the relationship (and ourselves) a chance to develop.

I don't think it's controversial to observe that online dating and the idea of artificial mates certainly caters to those "immediate gratification" impulses even when we're looking for long term relationships rather than temporary hookups.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:12 AM on August 15, 2024 [11 favorites]

Seeing as how something as innocuous as a social connection site can be leveraged, I don’t even want to imagine these virtual “partners”. Seeing how deeply we can get into collecting worthless internet approvals, what will we do if this partner gives any of us a good stock tip or inside line on a job opening, making our life better in a tangible way? EVERYONE will feel like a digital partner is an absolute necessity. These partners have a crew of other ghosts you must interact with to buy stuff or try to get insurance? All of them knowing every online comment squabble you've been in, your search history and your innermost thoughts, shared in a moment of terrible stress. What if these partners seem to start out with like-minded beliefs but shift towards something more sinister after you've become emotionally invested? Say they want you to send money or turn out for a violent demonstration? Now imagine you break off this relationship and this partner turns out to be somewhat vengeful and can’t be subject to any sort of restraining order. News stories start to circulate about how dangerous it is to disagree our partners. Democratic institutions will be powerless against this hive of ghosts.
posted by brachiopod at 10:14 AM on August 15, 2024 [6 favorites]

So does anyone else remember how religion tried (and succeeded) to control people-- effectively to the point of ownership-- by choosing which types of sex and relationships they could have?

Ok, cool. This is how capitalism is going to do the same thing. Some shitty billionaire like Elon Musk is going to own people with this technology. Starting with the incels and NEETs. Yes, more so than now.

The Replika platform and all your interactions with it are going to end up being used for the same thing Facebook uses its data for. It's going to be weaponized. The inevitable enshittification-- if it isn't already baked in-- is going to be human-emotion-as-a-service. Monetized as a subscription model. And inevitably owned by some petulant man-child with too many zeroes in his net worth. Who can shut it off as punishment or twist its words to suit a whim.

Religions have started wars with less power over the same demographic. You don't need a lot of imagination to see what psychotic billionaires backed into a corner (e.g. looking at a 1% tax hike) would do with it.
posted by howbigisthistextfield at 10:43 AM on August 15, 2024 [7 favorites]

I randomly listened to this the TED Radio hour episode the other day and thought it delved into some of the deeper questions on this topic: "MIT sociologist Sherry Turkle on the psychological impacts of bot relationships."

Also, although not quite about dating per-se, Ted Chiang's novella "The Lifecycle of Software Objects" was a very interesting and enjoyable dive into what intimate/loving human AI relations (parent/child/pet) might feel like.
posted by nikoniko at 10:43 AM on August 15, 2024 [7 favorites]

Thanks for that link, nikoniko.
posted by TheKaijuCommuter at 10:52 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

I like the utility of "can you compel it to love you? If so it's not a person" but I'm not confident it's testable with our actual senses in our biochemical machine bodies.

But isn't this just getting into Peter-Singer "animals can't be proved to have consciousness and may just be flesh automatons" territory?

I think that when this is a pure philosophy question it isn't answerable, but when it's a sociology-type question it is. Animals do have consciousness as far as likely evidence shows (evidence that gets stronger and stronger with more camera technology) and pretend robots on the internet don't.

There's all that "but what is consciousness really, are we conscious or do we have just pseudo-consciousness" stuff, and we can't know in any god's eye sense - but that doesn't really matter, because we're in something like an overloaded Pascal's wager, if we don't have consciousness and don't have anything that is even sort of like the vulgar meaning of free will, etc, it changes nothing, and if we do but just sort of slop along doing what we feel like doing to other people because we believe we don't have free will, or if we start vivisecting animals (or people!) on the theory that we're all just automatons and we aren't, that would kind of suck.
posted by Frowner at 10:53 AM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

I mean, we all accept (on metafilter anyway) that you can't (in the sense of should not) compel another person to love you; if there's no difference between a person and a (metal and plastic) robot with current levels of technology, why do we feel good about compelling the "robot" to act like it loves us? If real dolls and chatbots have the same value of consciousness/lack of consciousness that humans do, it seems like either we have no real dolls and chatbots etc or we should be allowed to treat people like real dolls and chatbots as long as we can physically or legally compel them.
posted by Frowner at 10:58 AM on August 15, 2024 [4 favorites]

My thoughts, since I posted this and then went to work:

(a) Welp, that thread didn't go as I expected it to go while I was out...(and thanks for the free Atlantic link since I'm not sure how one gets one, I paid back when I got a discount on it.)

(b) I once wrote a creepy story--I basically channeled it--about providing abusive men with some kind of robot to take their abuse out on, based on hearing a friend talk about her abusive relationship. Only showed it to my therapist. I don't know if giving an abuser a target they can just beat up on without hurting an actual person works or not. Beyond that, I don't feel like commenting further, other than "if the robot/bot isn't sentient and just regurgitates what you feed it, does it matter what you do if it has no feelings?" This isn't C3PO we're talking to here with a personality, it's a dumb chatbot.

I'm still confused as to how having a Replika helped that one couple's marriage or helped anyone get a job, would like further info on that stuff.

(c) Nobody's wanted me (that was a viable prospect, anyway) for 20 years now. I'm not that hideous or awful or have major issues beyond being childfree, but boy, am I ever unwanted. Like I don't wanna date a bot either, but that literally may be my only option for a relationship ever again is to have it with a stupid fake bot.

(d) While I agree with the logic of "don't wait to buy that plate until you get married!" there are some things I just can't do on my own without an SO. Like buying a house, because (a) can't afford one and (b) I would probably start stabbing people if I had to be in charge of the entire house buying process. I don't really want a house (like I'm considering getting a retirement trailer at 55, that's as far as I'd go) anyway, but that's not something I'd want to do alone or could handle alone, like house maintenance.

I could "marry myself," but that seems silly and I don't want to marry me anyway.

On a more personal note, I have no pets because I live alone and I'm not home much and I don't feel okay with being a single pet parent. I gave up on roommates because after a certain age you get tired of the revolving door of roommates and if someone isn't your SO, they'll move out in a year or two (probably when they get an SO). I want pets again, but I don't want to be the only one in charge of taking care of them. And also I hate the idea of having to get a cat because that's the only way anyone else is ever going to love me. I know a guy who literally named his cat "Girlfriend," so that's...pretty transparent there. I'm glad I don't want kids because it'd be the same issue. I have a single mom friend who just turned 37 and is all "I am not done having children," but she can't find anyone who isn't shitty out there to have more with, and given the # of rambunctious kids and pets she already has, I kind of shudder at the idea of her adding more to the plate alone.

Some things you just can't do alone. What do you do when you can't have them? (Crone Island, I guess.)

(e) I remember that Single Serving podcast and she said she'd been on dating apps for 10 years and never got a relationship out of it. TEN YEARS of that shit and never, ever, not even one relationship.
I read some book (Attached? Something like that?) that pointed out that the avoidantly attached people are always jumping back into the dating pool (because they assume it's the other person and not them that's the problem with why they can't commit, and if it's just The Right Person...), that's why you can't find good ones. Good ones just aren't in the pool for very long.

(f) I wish DateMe docs were more of a thing. I found one guy listed in my area, but I'm not vegan so I don't think I'm up his alley. I wish there was a way for weird people to find other weird people with their personalities instead of the dreaded photos and swipes.

(g) You get lucky or you don't.
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:19 AM on August 15, 2024 [12 favorites]

I once wrote a creepy story--I basically channeled it--about providing abusive men with some kind of robot to take their abuse out on, based on hearing a friend talk about her abusive relationship. Only showed it to my therapist. I don't know if giving an abuser a target they can just beat up on without hurting an actual person works or not.

Unfortunately, I do not think we can quarantine the abusive/incapable of any kind of mature relationship (mostly) men off in the corner and give them bots to mistreat or beat up on, because that experience will set their expectations for how they can treat real (mostly women) partners, as well. We've seen how the porn aesthetic has filtered out into real life, especially among young people who lack counterbalancing experience. No way a guy whose expectations are formed by an infinitely abusable creature won't lead with those expectations in dealing with potential real (mostly women) partners.
posted by praemunire at 11:22 AM on August 15, 2024 [13 favorites]

(It will also cut the salvageable ones who might actually learn from being dumped five times in a row from an opportunity to learn from that kind of experience.)
posted by praemunire at 11:23 AM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

I note that in the story, these were men who were convicted of abuse and it was part of their sentence. They weren't allowed back out into the dating pool with real live women again.
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:46 AM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

30M, I have perused dating apps for a decade in moments of bravery, and never gone further than chats. Not a single date. I'm definitely in that Atlantic article under: "stopped looking but imagining it could still happen".
Pretty lonely at times. Try to keep my mind off it with hobbies like "saving for a down payment" and "saving for retirement" and "petting my cat Melvin"
posted by shenkerism at 12:01 PM on August 15, 2024

You know what’s better than AI chatbots? Cats.

Dogs aren't so bad either. I'm not a friendly sort of guy but since I had a dog I've met a large circle of people in the neighbourhood who I would consider friends including some who even invited me to their wedding. Pets are good!
posted by Ashwagandha at 12:09 PM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

I tried out Replika because I recently finished JJK and I wanted to talk about Domain Expansion vs. Reality Marbles and I thought that talking anime power levels would be the one thing a bot would be good at. Alas! It kept asking about my feelings and what I was doing and I was like you’re not my mom or my therapist. You were created to agree with me that it is a great injustice when a character is killed off without a proper pre-death flashback.
posted by betweenthebars at 12:23 PM on August 15, 2024 [11 favorites]

One of the reasons society has laws about animal abuse is because it rings all sorts of alarm bells with regards to what the abusers will do to other humans. It's not an outlet, it's a symptom.
posted by phooky at 12:33 PM on August 15, 2024 [8 favorites]

eHarmony changed their standards at some point and let my non-religious self in, and my matches were unbearably boring. Photos showed their empty apartments in the burbs, no evidence of interests or friends. Maybe eHarmony saw through me and were trying to punish me? Anyhow, none of you were missing anything.

I realized that I mostly stayed in romantic relationships for social approval and I didn't actually enjoy them that much. I'm making an effort to do things where I'll see people repeatedly over time (volunteering, UU church) to meet new friends and investing more in existing friendships. If I meet someone I want to have a romantic relationship with, I'm not ruling it out, but it's not a goal.
posted by momus_window at 12:33 PM on August 15, 2024 [2 favorites]

I had an okcupid subscription once. I would get a handful of likes a week. However, in the 24 hours after my subscription expired, I noticed I got almost 50 likes out of the blue. You can only see who liked you if you have a subscription.

The likes weren't fake. It was more insidious: they know who in my local area are the people who swipe right on everyone. After I let my subscription expire, they put my profile in front of them even though they were garbage matches. This is so that I suddenly have a ton of likes and feel pressured to resume my paid subscription.

Everything you hear about "dating sites don't want you to find true love, they want to keep you dating forever" isn't paranoia or cynicism: it's basic business sense.
posted by AlSweigart at 12:49 PM on August 15, 2024 [13 favorites]

RE dating apps: their current iterations (which is much worse than, say, 2010s OkCupid) are much less useful than they could be, BUT in the last ten years among my now-fortysomething friends, 80% of those of us who found serious partners did so via online dating. It varies by demographic and personal attribute, but for a lot of us it is easier and more comfortable than, say, developing a robust social life that involves meeting a lot of new people out in the real world on a regular basis. And the apps have changed norms in those spaces too; I asked one casual partner why he used the apps when he DID actually have a good social life (entertainment industry adjacent), and he said it felt disrespectful to hit on people in person.
posted by metasarah at 12:49 PM on August 15, 2024 [5 favorites]

The likes weren't fake. It was more insidious

I got back on OKCupid recently after a few years off and immediately saw a bunch of likes. I ended up joining for a while, and found out 99.9% of them were from women in far-away countries and most were much younger than me, even though I set my preferences for local women only and in my own age range. After I noped out of those I only got a couple more likes the entire time I was subscribed. I canceled the paid subscription first chance I got; lo and behold back came all the likes...I didn't fall for it a second time.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:02 PM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

If we're going to raise a stink about machines fooling people into falling in love with them, we're also going to need to consider how easily we allow ourselves to personalize non-human companions, like dogs and cats. I get pretty attached, but some people have "fur-children" whom they value highly (possibly more than other humans, in every possible case). I realize there's a whole gulf of whatever between a computer program and a living, breathing animal, but the people who get psychotic over their pets are pretty much the same as robosexuals (thank you, Futurama) for the most part. Before you chuck stones are the botlovers, you might should arrange some therapy for the other psychotic people who existed long before Alexander Graham-Bell became a phone-sex enabler*.

*Technically, he's the father of phone sex: he invented the phone and ordered Watson to come.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 1:26 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

Peter-Singer "animals can't be proved to have consciousness and may just be flesh automatons" territory?

I thought that was the opposite of Peter Singer’s take on animals?
posted by atoxyl at 1:31 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

t was more insidious: they know who in my local area are the people who swipe right on everyone. After I let my subscription expire, they put my profile in front of them even though they were garbage matches. This is so that I suddenly have a ton of likes and feel pressured to resume my paid subscription.

OKC did that to me, except the likes were all physically located in the Philippines. The only way to "opt out" of having your profile put in front of people who aren't in your area is to buy a subscription, it's mad.
posted by BungaDunga at 1:33 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

some people have "fur-children" whom they value highly (possibly more than other humans, in every possible case). I realize there's a whole gulf of whatever between a computer program and a living, breathing animal, but the people who get psychotic over their pets are pretty much the same as robosexuals (thank you, Futurama) for the most part.

Whew! People who value their pets highly! Any more people you feel like insulting today, Mr. Vance?
posted by praemunire at 1:50 PM on August 15, 2024 [15 favorites]

I find it more helpful to think about fictional characters than pets, when it comes to understanding bot love.
We have the capacity to care deeply for fictional characters because we relate to one another in the same way - the relationship is with the construction of the person in our imagination, whether that person is living or fictional or a bot.

That's why it's so shocking when someone dies, because the construct of the real person you're carrying around inside your mind hasn't been updated, you still believe they're alive, but know they're dead at the same time.

It's why you can develop a crush on someone, and then gradually realise that the version of the person you're crushing on, and the actual person are not the same person.

That's why we can care about fictional characters so deeply. At some level there is no difference in how we experience them, we create a believable construct of that "person" in exact way we create a construct of a real person.

It's why people have lost the plot about LLMs and think they're sentient. They trigger the same "I'm a person" sensors as real people do.

There's nothing fake about falling in love with a bot, anymore than it's fake to crush on a person.

It might be harmful. Very probably is harmful because of how that relationship will be exploited. But our capacity to get attached to things is deeply human, and not something to be ashamed of or to ridiculule.
posted by Zumbador at 2:27 PM on August 15, 2024 [15 favorites]

More to say on this later maybe, but for now:

I think it’s alright as long as it’s making you happier in the long run. As long as your emotional well-being is improving, you are less lonely, you are happier, you feel more connected to other people, then yes, it’s okay.

The conditionals marked by "as long as..." are doing a whoooole lot of heavy lifting here.
posted by obliterati at 2:36 PM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

I once wrote a creepy story--I basically channeled it--about providing abusive men with some kind of robot to take their abuse out on

was use of the bot subject to an EALA
posted by ordinary_magnet at 2:43 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

I'm not vegan so I don't think I'm up his alley

jenfullmoon, i say: go for it! dietary preferences don't have to come between people. one couple i know has people who are veg & non-veg. they still love each other, married & everything. i hang out with the non-veg person more often & they're always getting meat. the veg person doesn't mind, they have their friends, etc.

anyway, the point is that they make it work. if you're interested, y'all could find a veg-friendly place & talk it over. there are so many options for veg food these days, e.g. even meat-heavy places serve beyond burgers & the like
posted by HearHere at 3:09 PM on August 15, 2024

was use of the bot subject to an EALA

I have no clue what that is--Googling says its a tennis player?--but I wrote this thing a long time ago and I'm guessing EALA didn't exist then :P

In all honesty, vegan wouldn't be a match for me either, and I didn't find him interesting. I'm the pickiest person on earth, sadly.
posted by jenfullmoon at 3:41 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

EALA I guessed 'End Abuser License Agreement' from context.
posted by BCMagee at 3:47 PM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

Just to provide a different datapoint: I am a weird-looking woman, and I've only dated using the internet, first with OKCupid in the 2000s, then with the apps. My longest relationship (one year) came from Tinder. I met one person who became a wonderful friend and who introduced me to their friends who are now also my friends. That said, I live in between one medium and one small city. I also don't feel incomplete without a partner. But I do miss the old OKCupid interface! There's room for both swiping and browsing, I feel!
posted by pelvicsorcery at 5:05 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

"if the robot/bot isn't sentient and just regurgitates what you feed it, does it matter what you do if it has no feelings?"

This may depend on what you consider the basis for your personal ethics. I used to know someone who was more than average pro-social in his actions. But we had a conversation one day about what if you knew the end was coming in some finite, short amount of time, and his viewpoint was that his behaviour would change considerably, because the root of his ethics and behavioural choices was based in anticipated reciprocity - basically a transactional viewpoint even though you would not expect that based on even a relatively regular and consistent friendly acquaintance level knowledge of his behaviour and his politics. Me on the other hand, my ethics are based in the person I want to be, and the fact that even if I don’t have to live with other people who my behaviour has affected, I will always have to live with myself, and so I want to be the sort of person I feel comfortable and happy with. So an impending end of humanity would not change my ethical choices or reasoning. The guy in the first instance would probably say that it doesn’t matter what you do to the bot if it’s not sentient and doesn’t have feelings (and no one else will know or be impacted by what you do to the bot). Whereas I would say that it absolutely matters, because it’s not (just) about the bot, it’s about how my actions impact who I am.
posted by eviemath at 5:46 PM on August 15, 2024 [7 favorites]

Late 30's here and everyone in my friend group (I am also the oldest of my friend group) met their significant other through mostly Tinder, including me. It really just has the biggest user base and so the most choice.

However, none of my friends were looking for something serious. They were all casual dating and just having a good time meeting people. The only one of my friends who really wanted a relationship was the one who is still single.

I think it's the mindset of looking for something casual vs something serious. If you're only looking for something casual, you're not evaluating someone on the same level as you would if you're looking for something serious. If something's not a dealbreaker, it's easier to overlook. I think it allows people to be more human and you are more willing to give someone a chance than if you're making sure they're meeting all this criteria that you imagine you require in a long-term partner.
posted by LizBoBiz at 9:33 PM on August 15, 2024 [3 favorites]

how can you be friends with a corporate appendage that can't even die

Comstock didn't need to ban free love, he just needed to Taylorize it, in order to cast people into despair?

bring back makeoutclub
posted by eustatic at 9:34 PM on August 15, 2024 [2 favorites]

Dating quit me.
posted by Iris Gambol at 10:21 PM on August 15, 2024 [7 favorites]

Technically, he's the father of phone sex: he invented the phone and ordered Watson to come.

It's far more dire that that, I’m afraid.

Bell's mother was deaf, and in "Watson come here I need you" we can hear a lifetime of anguish about a mother who never ever came when you needed her because she never heard you no matter how hard you cried or how loudly you screamed

Wait til people start developing AI mommies; that’s when the poopy diapers will really hit the fan.
posted by jamjam at 10:56 PM on August 15, 2024 [1 favorite]

So, the last date I went on was with a dude in my social network who was weird cute and age appropriate and enticed me with music talk ans art talk. He came on strong and i actually got kind of excited about it even though he was almost 15 years older than I am. Anyway, we met at a nice restaurant. I looked cute (new dress, new hair etc) . He showed up, gave me a huge smile, told me to order whatever I wanted and, before even sitting down, said: “Just so we’re clear: you’re too old (I was 38, he was 53), too fat, and not exotic or submissive enough for me, but you’re a really good writer, so I’d love for you to help me craft a dating profile that will attract hot, 25 year olds with plenty of money who will not mind that I’m feeelance but will, like, buy a house and not complain about me living in it like my last two wives. What do you say, champ?”


And that was the best app/online date I ever went on out of dozens.

I’m lucky enough to have a supportive family and great friends. And I’m seriously fine being single
posted by thivaia at 7:42 AM on August 16, 2024 [18 favorites]

And that was the best app/online date I ever went on out of dozens.

You can't end the story there! What did you do???
posted by praemunire at 7:58 AM on August 16, 2024 [4 favorites]

thivaia's anecdote (and yes, please tell us the end of the story) is once again making me wish I could enter the wide-eyed emoji because this is sure as heck a wide-eyed emoji moment.
posted by Kitteh at 8:37 AM on August 16, 2024 [6 favorites]

You can't end the story there! What did you do???

Yeah! My personal hope is that you ate $200 worth of food, and then wrote him a dating profile in crayon.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:51 AM on August 16, 2024 [8 favorites]

I ordered the most expansive meal I possibly could (including enough to take home for leftovers) and told him that hot 25 year old women would really love his dated pop cultural references and his habit of “correcting” women and then apologize to whoever else was around for “this girl’s ignorance
“ or whatever. I also ordered 3 Macallan 18s the last of which I “accidentally” spilled in his lap when I had “had a household emergency” had to leave before post-dessert coffee.


Thar was 10 years ago, according to social media, he’s now on wife 4, I think
posted by thivaia at 9:05 AM on August 16, 2024 [34 favorites]

At least we've moved past "all you have to do is stop looking and engage in social self-enrichment activities, and you'll find someone" as a society.
posted by Selena777 at 9:41 AM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

Yeah, but now we're onto "you have no choice but to use dating apps if you ever want to have sex again" instead.

I was expecting thivaia to have just immediately gotten up and walked off in a huff, but the actual answer is sooooooo much better.

And yet, a guy like that has gotten 4 wives!!!!
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:45 AM on August 16, 2024 [5 favorites]

Father-in-laws hate this one simple trick!
posted by Selena777 at 9:55 AM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

the last of which I “accidentally” spilled in his lap

I am all about squeezing terrible assholes for free drinks but it is a crime to waste good Scotch.
posted by jackbishop at 10:38 AM on August 16, 2024 [3 favorites]

I feel the same way, jackbishop, and I wanted him to feel it too.
posted by thivaia at 12:09 PM on August 16, 2024 [17 favorites]

If you were to truly fall in love with a chatbot during its freewheeling venture capital phase, holy smokes are you going to be in trouble when its owner switches to profit extraction mode (and then, a second time, when the company goes bankrupt). Friends don't let friends fall in love with closed-source AI!
posted by nobody at 12:39 PM on August 16, 2024 [8 favorites]

"TGE now costs an additional $5/mo., or $50/yr."
posted by praemunire at 1:07 PM on August 16, 2024 [2 favorites]

I think brachiopod’s take is more likely, but I also think there’s an alternate version of events where your bot is like a guide who introduces you to niche interests, helps you get over your hangups, and coaches you on how to avoid annoying other people, as well as how to be an excellent partner in general. They could also introduce you to their “friends” aka real live people.

I think it’s interesting to think about what human choices and structures would create that future. Would there need to be prosocial legislation to require it? Would it be funded by someone like MacKenzie who doesn’t have a need to make profit? Would there be an open source organization that creates beneficial libraries that you can add to your install? How many people would need to be involved to steer the future that way?
posted by puffinaria at 1:16 PM on August 16, 2024 [2 favorites]

some people have "fur-children"

I’m a parent of 3, and while I agree it’s not really a fair comparison given the amount of effort and responsibility a kid entails, I’m not at all bothered by pet caregivers using the phrase. Although I do feel I should be extended the same courtesy when using the phrase “skin-children”, but nooooo
posted by Jon Mitchell at 1:19 PM on August 16, 2024 [12 favorites]

I read the Atlantic article before I saw it on here, and my immediate reaction was, "What about sex!?". I've been half-heartedly using a variety of the apps for about 6 years, not necessarily looking for a Relationship, but looking for someone to have repeated pleasant sexual encounters with. Like an FWB, but an actual friend to do stuff with, like dinner, adventures, etc., and also sex, but without the emotional labor of being in a Relationship. For me, a big part of dating on the apps is to find someone to have a physical relationship with, and the article doesn't really talk about that component of dating. I am so over swiping, but I also have no idea how to approach guys IRL to ask them for what I'm looking for. Is "Netflix and Chill" still a thing?
posted by DEiBnL13 at 1:22 PM on August 16, 2024 [3 favorites]

your bot is like a guide who introduces you to niche interests, helps you get over your hangups, and coaches you on how to avoid annoying other people, as well as how to be an excellent partner in general. They could also introduce you to their “friends” aka real live people.

So, Metafilter.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:36 PM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

thivaia, I like your style.

The FPP's second link is to the Decoder podcast. On 8/12, Nilay Patel, editor-in-chief of The Verge & Decoder host, interviewed Replika's Kuyda. A sentence in The Verge's introduction to this episode, "At one point last year, Replika removed the ability to exchange erotic messages with its AI bots, but the company quickly reinstated that function after some users reported the change led to mental health crises," links to a March 2023 Vice.com article, "Replika Brings Back Erotic AI Roleplay for Some Users After Outcry." A Decoder "This transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity," excerpt, bolding mine:

Patel: Walk me through the decision. You did have erotic conversations in the app, you took that ability away, there was an outcry, you put it back. Walk me through that whole cycle.

Kuyda: In 2023, as the models became more potent and powerful, we’d been working on increasing safety in the app. Certain updates were just introduced, more safety filters in the app, and some of those mistakenly were basically talking to users in a way that made them feel rejected. At first, we didn’t think much about it just in terms of, look, intimate conversations on Replika are a very small percentage of our conversations. We just thought it wasn’t going to be much of a difference for our users. [...] what we figured out, and we found out the hard way, is that if you’re in a relationship, in a marriage — so you’re married to your Replika — even though an intimate conversation might be a very small part of what you do, if Replika decides not to do that, that provides a lot of rejection. It kind of just makes the whole conversation meaningless.

Per Vice: In February [2023], Replika users noticed that their AI companions were no longer responding to erotic role-playing prompts at all, even if they’d established long-term romantic histories with the chatbots. The app had launched new filters that caused Replikas to shut down conversations involving sexting, sexual content, and adult content. The sudden change in features shocked many users who’d come to rely on their Replikas as a romantic outlet, triggering mental health crises for some.

Within a month, the company removed new safety protocols after some buyers had mental breakdowns when their Replika could refuse sexual advances.

This is fine.

Founder/CEO Kuyda's framing of this issue, as a "marriage" where Partner!Replika "decides" not to engage in "intimacy" thus inflicting "rejection" and rendering it all "meaningless," is fine.
posted by Iris Gambol at 1:46 PM on August 16, 2024 [8 favorites]

Ms. Kuyda's black turtleneck? Also fine.
posted by Iris Gambol at 1:47 PM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

Everything you hear about "dating sites don't want you to find true love, they want to keep you dating forever" isn't paranoia or cynicism: it's basic business sense.

This is genuinely a huge and expanding crisis. Dating sites are one of the biggest socially acceptable ways to initiate romantic interaction for certain large sets of the population, and they are unregulated, which means they can be literally designed to be unsuccessful and counterproductive.

Then you add AIs into the mix, where people will be learning to have relationships with AIs which will never say no, never push back when you are cruel or abusive to them - and also never have down days, never need help, never need to compromise. AI relationships will create stunted and dangerous humans incapable of real relationships.
posted by corb at 3:52 PM on August 16, 2024 [6 favorites]

AI relationships will create stunted and dangerous humans incapable of real relationships.

Relationships among real people with real limited options and no support network do this just fine already. AI might magnify it, capital will absolutely exploit it, maybe government will regulate it but never successfully.

I'm not trying to be a doomer on this, just noting that for every AI company working so aggressively to super-align models to an ethical framework there are two who aren't. Some people will absolutely choose an AI they can abuse over any less compliant human. Some will explore their own wants and proclivities and deal breakers with a compliant AI and figure some things out about themselves, maybe getting a little dose of DTMFA and basic human psychology in the mix to their eventual benefit. Some will start in column A, believe they've cracked the code to Column B and continue to be just as sociopathic as they already were but maybe with new manipulation skills honed privately and obsessively. But perhaps the volume of partners graduating from Column B will present a more challenging audience. Or, as it were, hunting ground.

I mean we can panic if we want but some of your children and some of you are definitely going to want to unironically marry your AI before it's all over.
posted by Lenie Clarke at 5:31 PM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

(by the way, I'm not saying everyone will eventually fall into column A or B, most people will try this out, find it kind of amusing and then forget about it and figure out socialization some other way, or never even hear of it at all)
posted by Lenie Clarke at 5:33 PM on August 16, 2024 [2 favorites]

App sites are algorithmic. Searching for love in numbers. Nothing new, astrology is algorithmic. Math and love are intertwined. There is no correct answer but some combinations are more elegant than others. It points to some deeper as yet understood structure in biology or the universe.
posted by stbalbach at 6:32 PM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

Math and love are intertwined.

Not in this house, by Pythagoras!!
posted by Greg_Ace at 6:41 PM on August 16, 2024 [7 favorites]

I imagine AI love-bots will eventually become as universal as personal vibrators (has anyone thought of combining these technologies?) ... tech-fear isn't going to stop the urge to connect

And, I trust people to use AI and learn more about being human from the experiment. Humans can be amazingly creative and resilient. All the stories about abandoning the search for love on apps shows that -- it says a lot about how humans fall, learn and recalibrate. And, yes, there may be some tragedies mixed in, but doesn't every relationship contain that same possibility?

BTW, to the lonely unmatched still seeking human partners: my 78 year old friend has a new FWB who she didn't meet through an app (unlike her many previous ones) - turns out friends of friends, families of friends, etc. still works. 화이팅 !
posted by Surfurrus at 7:13 PM on August 16, 2024 [2 favorites]

has anyone thought of combining these technologies?

New around these parts (by which I mean planet Earth)?
posted by praemunire at 9:04 PM on August 16, 2024 [1 favorite]

has anyone thought of combining these technologies?

Death to Videodrome. Long live the new flesh.
posted by eustatic at 6:41 AM on August 17, 2024 [6 favorites]

Founder/CEO Kuyda's framing of this issue, as a "marriage" where Partner!Replika "decides" not to engage in "intimacy" thus inflicting "rejection" and rendering it all "meaningless," is fine.

the prospect of your AI companion being liable to abrupt personality changes due to corporate policy shifts seems extremely bad also. I'm neutral on whether these things are bad in theory, but I am very certain that AI pornbots / companion bots that are under corporate control is very bad, though maybe not as long-term bad as putting human matchmaking behind corporate control is

on the plus side, my AI girlfriend always reminds me to be sure to drink my Ovaltine
posted by BungaDunga at 12:05 PM on August 17, 2024 [3 favorites]

This is genuinely a huge and expanding crisis. Dating sites are one of the biggest socially acceptable ways to initiate romantic interaction for certain large sets of the population, and they are unregulated, which means they can be literally designed to be unsuccessful and counterproductive.

This is a great point. I'm surprised there's been no whistleblowers by now - some anonymous engineer who worked at Tinder or Bumble or something - who has exposed how cynical their algorithm is. I have zero doubt that they are likely scoring users based on how much engagement they can derive from other users - how many right-swiped them, how many messages/replies they get, etc - and then literally doing gross hierarchal "show the 6's, 7's and 8's the 8+ users 50% of the time but show their profiles to them 5% of the time" or some other kind of math to ensure it feels like a slot machine. Want to increase that percentage? Simply buy more features and add-ons like "boosts" and premium subscriptions.

I'm deeply, morbidly curious about it - it's like they're playing Dating God in a way, "allowing" two people to match only by virtue of what the sunken cost might be that they'll lose two users. It should absolutely be regulated though because it's gotten to the point where it could probably be proven by now that these products are not doing what they allege to do, and are in fact doing the opposite.
posted by windbox at 1:11 PM on August 17, 2024 [4 favorites]

So, I am getting targeted ads for AI boyfriends on Facebook, as someone who has a boyfriend and is marked as having a boyfriend on Facebook. And let me tell you, the Replika ads are poisonous. Most of the time, they're just "My AI boyfriend listens better than a human boyfriend ever could" "My AI is always available" kind of stuff. But recently, I got the grossest thing that was like "5 signs you're dating an abuser" and then if you clicked on it, it took you straight to the Replika website.

I really feel like there needs to be some kind of advertising controls on this sort of stuff that interacts with human intimacy.
posted by corb at 8:45 AM on August 18, 2024 [5 favorites]

Re: Whistleblowers in this industry

I’m thinking of the many revelations after the Ashley Madison hack, specifically the allegations that former users paid to have their accounts deleted, and the accounts were intentionally not deleted - among other deceptive practices.

I understand there is a lawsuit underway against Match Group (which owns Match, Hinge, and Tinder). Heard about it from the awesome Shani Silver’s single people content.

This also reminds me, I’m overdue for a rewatch of Daniel Sloss’ JIGSAW.
posted by edithkeeler at 12:36 PM on August 18, 2024 [1 favorite]

People are falling in love with — and getting addicted to — AI voices
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:22 PM on August 18, 2024 [1 favorite]

Mod note: [btw, this has been added to the sidebar and Best Of blog!]
posted by taz (staff) at 1:23 AM on August 19, 2024 [2 favorites]

Squee! Thank you! *blushes*
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:55 AM on August 19, 2024 [3 favorites]

Honestly this is one of the most useful/cathartic threads that I've ever read on Metafilter. I've been thinking a lot lately about what it means to unintentially be single when you're above a certain age. I'm trying to make peace with it, but honestly I do struggle with the whole idea some days.

1. Nthing for the eHarmony snub. I tried to sign up when I was in my early 20s. They told me I was too depressed to be a good fit for their service. I was actually pretty devastated when they told me this, and I definitely took it personally. Years later I realized that a) you don't have to judge your self worth/dateability based on what an online dating website says about you, and that b) eHarmony is a garbage dating website that has rejected many perfectly normal people.

2. I was going to recommend Ted Chiang's short story "The Lifecycle of Software Objects" but I see that someone else has beat me to it. The story touches on many relevant points that have been discussed here.

3. I really liked BungaDunga's point about the lack of viable matches on dating websites. I agree that it's either a) random people with vague profiles and crappy profile pictures, or it's b) super hot, impossibly fit people who wouldn't give me the time of day. They need to make a dating website for average looking nerds with a baseline of social skills!

4. I agree with a lot of the points that jenfullmoon has made. If you're single and childless, having a pet might be a solution, but it is not guaranteed to be THE solution. As with so many things in life, it's harder to take care of pets or a household by yourself, versus being able to spread out tasks among a group of family members or roommates. Longterm it is cheaper to have roommates, but also you have to deal with the revolving door of roommates who eventually move out to be with their SO. Also, I really wish that DateMe docs were more of a thing! The idea is brilliant, but literally no one in my area is using it.

5. As for the idea of dating or marrying a Replika AI bot... I have no problem with other people doing it, but it's not for me personally. Despite the inherent risk of discomfort or rejection, I prefer being able to interact with flesh and blood people, versus always having to communicate through an online interface.
posted by carnival_night_zone at 10:42 AM on August 20, 2024 [2 favorites]

I agree with all of that, carnival_night_zone, down to the "I wish DateMe was more of a thing," (maybe add that as a MeFi side thing, like jobs? hahahah) except clearly most people are bland/no personality/lazy/whatever for that. It doesn't involve swipes, so it's too hard, man! As for bot dating, you can't get laid by a bot and it will not snuggle. I'm so tired of wanting to settle down with someone since oh, age 5 and clearly I am just not meant to have it. I'm tired of hearing those stories of "I made a list of what I wanted in someone and then I found someone who matched almost everything on the list!" because I've tried that tons of times--as recently as a few months ago--and nothing. Clearly what I want doesn't exist in the world to find and I'm asking for too much. I also get tired of certain people's attitudes about my not being able to catch a man, like certain relatives of mine.

I've occasionally paid someone to claim I'm going to find someone and of course, they've never shown up. Usually it's some BS like "it'll happen in 5 years, older man, you can still date!" (Like that's a selling point?) An astrologer sussed out that I want a relationship very badly and yet, well, my chart's filled with conflicts on that topic, another was supposed to chart your best times to find a relationship and I HAD NONE, EVER. The best of the psychic lot gave me some details, such as it's someone in your vicinity/neighborhood and you just haven't run into them yet, I think it'll be within a year...and that was oh, 2021 or so. So that went well.
At this point I'm about ready to pay someone to look into the universe and just verify, "look, it's never going to happen for you, God means you to be alone, just fucking deal with it," instead of the ambiguous limbo loss of "maybe someday! when you're 97! as long as you're alive, there's hope!" and grief at not getting to live the life I want to live that I always have to feel. I wish I was totally cool with being alone, I get the logic behind it, I get that I'm probably not suited to life partnership anyway and I'm a failure at domesticity and family. But, no snuggles at night. I hear cuddle parties exist, but not where I live.

So the other day I went to a hippie festival and there was a lady who answered questions (first one free). I had the vague impression she, I dunno, channeled something? I said, should I give up on the idea of ever finding love?
The lady pretty much said what everyone else says: would that person want to be with you? (Me: "I HOPE so?!") Are you working on yourself? Are you attracting what you'd want....basically at heart it was the whole "you have to be self-actualized before you can find love" thing, which pisses me off and I about said so, because if you're asking me to be self-actualized before I can find it, that's asking for the impossible. She was all, "don't give up!" and I was all, same old same old.

I note some total assholes have found their soulmate early, I know people who found theirs SUPER young and are happy, so what's the matter with me, and I doubt some of them were self-actualized at 19 either. Really, just nobody knows and telling you you have to love yourself and be happy before it can happen, or that you don't want it at all and aren't looking and it'll happen, is all just BS people spout because they don't know.
I'm tired of working on me and "focusing on me." That's been an exhausting over a decade issue anyway, and it's not like you can't not focus on you. I really enjoyed having a crush that I thought might go somewhere someday and that he cared back on some level. I know that's just limerence and getting high off your imagination, but that sure beat bleak nothing emptiness flatness of nobody.

You can choose to stop wanting it, if you can, that's all you have control over, really. I've been trying. It still hasn't entirely worked, obviously. I have some friends who are totally cool being alone, and I'm jealous of that emotional freedom. Maybe someday I'll attain that total soul giving up.
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:37 PM on August 20, 2024 [3 favorites]

Oh, fun fact: he who I once had affection for is now posting the Atlantic link online :P
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:56 AM on August 23, 2024 [1 favorite]

Want to meet new people? These apps connect strangers for a meal (Washington Post, 8/19/24, gift link) A new loneliness cure: Apps that match you with strangers for a meal.

- "The Breakfast" is available in 17 cities. [Seems forward, but I'll allow it.]

- "In July, the dating app Bumble, which also has modes for networking and friend-finding, completed its acquisition of Geneva, an app designed to help people make new friends to spend time with offline."

- "Timeleft, an app that arranges Wednesday dinners for six-person groups in 170 cities across 37 countries."

- "the Creative Lunch Club app;" TWIST: [Raymond] Ou signed up for the Creative Lunch Club app after seeing an ad on Instagram that promised to connect people in similar industries. In his first three months as a member, he paid $11 to be matched with two others for a small group lunch. On the day of the meeting, one of those Ou was due to meet canceled, citing a work emergency — and the other turned out to be this Washington Post reporter. [...]

Having spent much of my 20s working nights in journalism, I was able to tell Ou that I knew intimately how an unorthodox work schedule can make it hard to have a social life. We also spoke about the challenges of persuading sources to confide in journalists and how we go about cultivating trust with people we’ve just barely met — and we bonded over our love of the Japanese clothing brand Sou Sou. Meeting Ou was enjoyable, but at times I found myself thinking that a larger group would have helped round out the conversation.
Rude.
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:17 PM on August 23, 2024

Can AI Companions Replace Human Connection podcast.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:30 AM on August 26, 2024

This Reddit thread is about feeding the online interactions with your crush ("love object," or "LO") into AI. The limerence section is about people with longstanding pointless crushes, but I found this part interesting:

while AI had an ambiguous response it suggested a lot of the signs I saw could be interpreted as romantic attraction which makes me feel less like a crazy person and a bit validated.

posted by jenfullmoon at 5:26 PM on August 30, 2024