Hacker News Reader

Comment by 8f2ab37a-ed6c | Hacker News Reader

This feels like a market opportunity: an online dating website that extensively confirms that you are a real person, somehow. I would happily pay for that. With gen AI images getting really good, it feels like we're only a few months to years away from being incapable of telling these profiles apart. For now, you can still spot them.

How you would kickstart this high-security two sided marketplace is anybody's guess though, not sure there would be enough interest.

I have had to give up on Tinder which at least in my city has become entirely overrun by fake extortion or pig butchering profiles. Bumble is half-way there. Hinge is somehow resisting for now, but I've successfully reported really high quality fake accounts even on there.

I miss the early days of app-based dating apps when so much of your time wasn't wasted on bots.

View on HN

I think many of these sextortionists are "real persons." That person they just arrested in Delaware was one.

There's a lot of really good-looking people that have learned to use their looks to the disadvantage of others (not just women -men, too).

I suspect Grindr is a target, as well, but folks are probably less likely to make complaints. Also, a lot of these extortionists are from nations that are not very tolerant of homosexuality, so they are more likely to go after hetero sites.

Thats just a weird unfounded belief.

Scammers are basically invalidating human intuition about any social aspect online.

I had a great experience on Tinder and met my now fiancee... lots of fake accounts on there, but I found them super easy to spot. I only swiped right on women whose profiles I deeply resonated with- nerdy, introverted, and adventurous/outdoorsy women. Usually with simple non-glamorous profile photos doing real outdoor activities in our local region, in places I recognized in the photos and could have a fun conversation about with them. I'd chat a while to see if they were intelligent and interesting to talk to before inviting them on a date.

I don't think it's possible to fake being a deep, introspective, and intelligent person that is also adventurous/outdoorsy and people with those traits generally have no interest in being extortionists.

Basically my tip for online dating: screen online only for personality and character traits, and only later in person on a date for looks/chemistry/physical attractiveness. The former isn't something you can fake online, but the latter is.

Unrelated to my response here, but I feel the need to mention it given the context of this article: you have to be a real terrible person to be on a "cheating" dating site, and deserve whatever you get. In this day and age non-monogamy is pretty normal, just be honest with your partners if that is what you are into. It's not for me, but some people love it.

Many mainstream apps do video verification of profile pictures.

https://bumble.com/en/help/how-can-i-verify-my-profile

https://hingeapp.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/1030322143553...

https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034941812-P...

Although it is not mandatory.

> With gen AI images getting really good, it feels like we're only a few months to years away from being incapable of telling these profiles apart. For now, you can still spot them.

There's still the old school method of getting around this -- they just use someone else's photos.

Yep, well aware of it, but my impression was that they were fairly straightforward to bypass. I imagine you would need something that's higher effort, some kind of KYC-grade process, but I'm sure that introduces a massive amount of onboarding friction for the thing to scale.

It currently costs $0.25 - $1.00 to verify someone's identity in the US & Europe, depending on the quality of verification you need. Tinder's revenue per user is something in the area of $20, and they're one of the highest revenue-per-user of all the apps. Bumble and Hinge are 30-50% lower revenue per user.

It's a sizeable chunk of revenues without much in the way of commercial gain - since the more you swipe (on humans, bots, or honeypots), the more ads they can show you, the more money they make.

If the business model relies on fake bot profiles, then it's literally fraud, no?

I imagine their excuse is that the dating apps are not creating the bots themselves, so they can deny being complicit. They can claim they're victims of evil scam groups that are very hard to fight against. In the meantime users get the impression that the pool is far wider than it is in reality.

Not entirely. It was years ago but I remember this op-ed of a woman who was hired by a company to build a dating profile on their site (they supplied her with photos of a woman the company had contracted for the photos).

The company made money by having men pay per message, or pay for 100 or 200 messages or something like that. Her job was to keep them talking, build relationships with them, and prevent them from finding out that the site was almost entirely made up of contractors like her. She said there was one man who she had been talking to for over a year, making hundreds of thousands of dollars off of him.

Ultimately, the company was never fined or the CEO charged with anything as their Terms of Service stated that they may utilize company-made profiles that the user may interact with to maintain an enjoyable experience (although said in much more opaque legalese).

Sounds similar to what's happening with OnlyFans nowadays, where customers believe they're interacting with their favorite "creator" they pay to subscribe to and to message, but in reality it's an outsourced worker in an emerging market economy impersonating them.

So just as moraly reprehensible just technically legal.

They don't have to verify everybody for free. In fact they could make verification an additional revenue center.

They could make verification a paid service. Once verified yourself you can filter out unverified people. Unverified people can't see verification status of others.

Or they could make verification free for women, but the men have to pay to see or filter by verification status.

> They could make verification a paid service. Once verified yourself you can filter out unverified people. Unverified people can't see verification status of others.

Or make verification a menu of choices. Imagine if they had a “verify bank account > X”. I’m sure there’s some gold diggers / sugar daddies (and mommas) that would find that helpful.

what!? sorry, but where did you get this number from?

a kyc check costs 10-15 euros in EU - admittedly, a kyc is more than identity, but still, your price range seems unrealistic - do you have some data to back it up?

I think those are just the sites oriented more towards people looking for serious relationships rather than a hookup, eg religion/culture/status-targeted matrimonial sites. Since people are far more likely to think with their brain rather than their genitals on such sites.

Hookup oriented services like Tinder and AM rely on low barriers so people don't put much thought into things.

I suppose that's true, but could you not argue that lonely people are equally as likely to be scammed as horny people? I would imagine both strong unmet needs and desperation are breeding ground for dropping one's guard.

That's a good point, although lonely people are also easily cheated by real people who aren't relying on fakery.

> extensively confirms that you are a real person

There's a sort of balance. By giving less information to a dating site, you might be safer, and limit how much information can get out in a breach.

And then there's the whole advertising/data collection/sharing behavior of most internet sites. "We never sell your information" (except they share it, or "use it for services" or whatever gets them off the hook)

I've also noticed that some folks on dating sites have been burned and are extremely hesitant to participate if a phone number or other personally identifiable information is required.

As usual it comes down to money. There are dating websites/apps out there that do what you're describing, and more. Typically for upper middle class and above clientele.

But membership fees range from $200-500/month.

So the problem seems to be matchmakers don't scale + don't look techy enough ....... maybe a double ended marketplace for (verified) grannies to curate you some nice verified human matches? upcharge for culturally specific grannies, a committee vs 1, pinning favorite matchmakers etc

Would be curious to learn more about this, can you name a couple of these? As a whale of these dating apps, on some months I'm likely spending about as much on there anyway, so it would be break-even for me.

As far as I know, none of my friends and acquaintances are on there super-apps. The closest I've heard of were matchmaking services that are free for women, but the men pay somewhere between 10 and 30 grand to get access, and it's a woman running the show, keeping track of everybody in the system.

> somehow, I would happily pay for that

When I was in my 20s, I found all of the "pay" dating services to be rip-offs.

Everyone who was on (pay dating site that I can't remember) was also on OkCupid, so it didn't make any sense to pay for a smaller net.

Table For Six (advertised on the radio) turned out to be a scam when I went to the interview. I should have known to walk out, instead of haggling, as soon as "twenty nine, ninety nine" was $2999.00. (I later met a fool who signed up for the service, turned out they had so few suckers that only a few people showed up at the events.)

You don't need much for verification that a profile is real. Photo of someone taking a selfie while following instruction (thumbs up, peace sign etc) alongside of their other photos, and AI or human confirmation before your profile is greenlit with a verified badge. That is all that is needed to confirm human.

To confirm these humans aren't extortionists would require photo ID verification like a license submission.

Have you looked into the EU Digital Identity [0]? Would this allow creating such a service?

[0] https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-...

nothing personal, but I see this kind of statements (especially on hn) "I would pay for this ..." but in reality, most people (as in, the population of Earth - 1) don't pay and are willing to trade their privacy/time/etc for a functionality that would cost them 5-10 ($/euro)

Sounds like you're describing something closer to a professional matchmaking service.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com