Kinky Labor Supply and the Attention Tax — Kortina

“As an example, consider how this increased competition plays out in online dating platforms. On Tinder, the top 20% of men are competing for the top 78% of women. Why? It’s a matter of the breadth of selection. Offline, due to the constraints of physical space and time, any given woman would have a finite set of potential partners to choose from. Online, the selection is much more vast and most women only “like” the most attractive men. The Gini coefficient for the “Tinder economy” is 0.58, which means that it has higher inequality than 95% the world’s national economies – in other words, it’s pretty grim if you’re a man in the bottom 80%.”

—Andrew Kortina and Namrata Patel. “Labor Supply and the Attention Tax.” kortina.nyc. October 13, 2018.

Strikes me as pretty grim for the bottom 80% of women too. Dissatisfied because of “settling” for a man of equal attractiveness, competing on qualities such as sexual availability or submissiveness, and other generally undesirable outcomes.

Online Dating Impersonaters — Quartz

“As we grow accustomed to foisting more and more complicated emotional tasks onto digital butlers, we lose our ability to tolerate inelegance or find value in social failure. Moments of awkwardness and heartbreak are an inevitable part of the dating experience, and they are essential in our evolution into mature adults. By outsourcing our courtship to robots (and robot-like humans) we might save ourselves some pain in the short term, but it degrades us, simplifies us, and fails to provide for our ultimate goal of finding someone accepting of our flaws. In this age of automation, romance isn’t just one click away—it’s guaranteed.

But if you’re willing to scrape the bottom of the barrel, what isn’t?”

—Chloe Rose Stuart-Ulin. “You could be flirting on dating apps with paid impersonators.” Quartz. April 26, 2018.