The matchmaking economy is probably worth billions if not trillions and it's an economy in it's infancy
Introducing MatchPool
MatchPool takes the power and utility of the blockchain data structure, paired with the algorithmic enforcement of the Ethereum smart contract, to solve the problem of match making. In the obvious example we have the dating networks and this is something many other developers have thought about, from the developers at Rchain, to Tauchain, but it is MatchPool that seems to be the first to have something planned out. MatchPool has the potential to have billions of users, to go mainstream overnight, simply by connecting people together in more useful ways than the current apps do.
References
1. http://matchpool.co/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Updated-Matchpool-Whitepaper-20MAR17.pdf
2. https://medium.com/matchpool/how-a-doctor-from-japan-can-use-matchpool-62a368084dd3#.yg4qv8bjf
3. https://www.facebook.com/matchpoolhq/
4. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2017/03/21/slack-meets-tinder-matchpool-launching-crowdfund-for-dating-scene-disruption/#501afef87e5f
5. https://twitter.com/matchpool
Seems like an interesting app, but I'm not sure if it directly benefits much from the decentralization that blockchain offers
I feel that we're in the midst of a blockchain boom where a lot of startups are adopting this technology even when the benefits are not that evident for their particular service, or worse yet, ill suited.
Maybe I'm not being creative enough but it seems to me that this app would function perfectly well without blockchain and just has a decentralized currency tagged on
I suppose you could be asking the question "can this only be built on a blockchain"? Perhaps in theory you could build it in centralized form but it would not be as powerful or have the same long term potential. How do you bring people together in a censorship resistant way? In a private way? Where everyone has incentive to cooperate?
The cost of a blockchain data structure is loss of efficiency. I don't see efficiency as the issue with Tinder, or LinkedIn, or Facebook, or OKCupid, or any of the current mechanisms people use to find the people they are looking to know. If we are talking about efficacy then Tinder and OKCupid aren't actually effective for what they claim to do, Facebook and LinkedIn don't necessarily bring people together but even if they did there are all sorts of issues with privacy, with the fact that the participants who provide the value don't own a piece of the platform, etc. When it's something like Meetup or LocalBitcoins then this can be censored by the authorities who don't want people with certain shared interests to meet. In the US there is the concept of freedom of association but this concept is not global.
Whether something like MatchPool is a success or failure I think isn't determined by the data structure it uses. The blockchain data structure offers greater security guarantees in terms of availability (the data is never lost) and better privacy. So in terms of information security you would gain data availability and confidentiality as a benefit in favor of moving to a blockchain/smart contract data structure. For that reason alone you could make a case for creating something like MatchPool because do we need a central authority watching every dating site, every Alice meets Bob at the mall, every movement, etc? So the confidentiality would actually take away the easy blanket surveillance aspect that a centralized service would have. The availability would mean not only would no one be tracking your relationships, whether it be your working or playing relationships, but it means also that the data will always be stored. This data could be shared in an anonymous way and used by AI in the long term to better the UX.
I've had the idea to build a decentralized dating service myself so I'm sure this is a popular idea. I would think the blockchain data structure itself is not enough, that Ethereum itself is not enough. I would say when people are looking to find love, or friendship, or co-workers, they don't really care as much about the mechanical efficiency such as if the process runs a few seconds faster or slower, but they care about the quality, the accuracy, the precision, the privacy (socially intimacy typically requires privacy), and we even see these trends with apps like Snapchat for example.
So I would say it is inevitable in the long term, and actually a better outcome socially if it makes the majority of the participants happy. It can bring risks, I don't deny this possibility. But the question is more a utilitarian question where I would ask is the happiness it could create worth the risks it could create? I would say the potential for happiness is much higher than the risks if it's designed appropriately, and with safeguards. I am open to alternative approaches which have less risk which could potentially generate similar happiness benefits as outcomes.
References
Thank you Dana for your very robust answer. I am very new to the crypto scene and have limited knowledge in this area, and you have succeeded in somewhat persuading me to see the virtues of the use of decentralization in this area.
Having the emotional range of a rock, I perhaps underestimated the importance of privacy in online dating/matchmaking services. Nor was I fully aware of the fairly noticeable fact that blockchain databases are essentially a trade off between decentralization and efficiency (as long as we're not comparing it to antiquated systems such as telegraphic transfer/SWIFT) until you elucidated it. Thank you
I think we're mostly in agreement here that although the added benefits of security and decentralization will likely outweigh the utility of greater efficiency foregone, that itself is unlikely to be the deciding factor as to whether this app succeeds.
However, I am not entirely convinced that this incentive structure cannot be replicated without the use of blockchain; in theory at least, nothing can prevent a centralized system adopting a economic incentive structure similar to that of matchpool or steem etc. Although admittedly none that are successful come to mind, but I think that's more a consequence of the corporate status quo rather than technology.
Ultimately I find what I've seen so far of matchpool to be a pretty neat app, and now see that decentralization here isn't entirely without utility as I had first thought. Even in the worst case scenario where the blockchain adds negligible utility value it could still serve to create some marketing buzz and help propel the user base to the critical mass it needs for such an app to take off.
Thank you again for your explanation, it was appreciated
Hey @trafalgar....I am glad you wrote back to @dana-edwards,
I am super behind in this discussion, but I think it's unfortunate that some of the really good post and replies are functionally hidden in Steemit because of the 7 day payout limit for authors and curators, especially when the OP curates and respond so informatively. I believe the accumulation of these thoughts and debates would bring up Steem's perceive value to the public, but I find it liken to going through a 2nd hand store looking for an unlove prized valued at hundreds but collecting dust under some boxes and books, and surprized to see it selling for only a few dollars.
Fine examples would be @dana-edwards old post, and the further back I went, the better the writings seem to get...oh well, I guess we are all shaped by the rewards we are given, can't fight game-theory povlov dog training we are all subjected too.
Your writing is another example. I feel you surely jest when you think people who have read your materials before do not prefer your longer articles, and even skip them for just the summary. It really can't be so, and more the lack of visibility as there is no 3rd party promoting anyone's material, or perhaps it's your first month back from a hiatus from Steemit.
It always bring value amazement to me how you marry insights and perspective with absurdity. And I can't even imagine anyone will skip your long writings, personally, I savor it like yummy chocolate.....which I chew slowly as I wipe away tears of endorphin overdose on your hard punchlines.
Anyways....I replied back to Dana-E below because I was grateful, but only she and probably less than 57 others has seen this and I just wanted you to know that I appreciate you asking her the questions that you did, and more so inducing her to respond with gusto from your thoughtful feedback.
Anyways, good job 8 months ago....pat on the back @trafalgar.
Sigh...this post and thread should be in total worth $100....not a mere $14.78 for and worst change for replies. The corresponding reply should be the reverse theoretical 75/25 split, so your part of the respond should be at least part of $75.
See my respond to dana-e below, no need to click link....just flip your mouse upside down and zoom zoom that little wheel like a toy car and you're see it shortly :)
https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dana-edwards/the-matchmaking-economy-is-probably-worth-billions-if-not-trillions-and-it-s-an-economy-in-it-s-infancy#@dj123/re-dana-edwards-the-matchmaking-economy-is-probably-worth-billions-if-not-trillions-and-it-s-an-economy-in-it-s-infancy-20171118t092539228z
aside from the 2 zaps that I made, everything posted on @trafalgar should be longer articles, there's been 3 or 4 since my return
the length has always been similar, about 600-900 words, although my most recent one was 1200, I don't really think the quality has dropped either, if anything, I made a conscious shift to favor stronger punchlines over raising more insightful points, not sure if it's no everyone's taste but we're experimenting.
I don't agree that longer articles are better. I would wager you're in the minority here, as I can judge just from the comments that most people don't read more than the title, and that's just from the people who bothered to comment.
I'll write a post about shorter content soon I think, but in a nutshell, I don't think it's chance 99% of the most viral content on the internet are all in short form, and I'm definitely making a push for it on here as I think it's better for the blockchain overall.
In terms of rewards, I think I met people half way by making a new account. Yes, I vote for my own content with my main account and post frequently, although I generally don't go 100% weight. This came at a cost of losing 6500 followers and a very established curation trail. And if i do say so myself, I think my content is pretty good, at least compared to the other stuff here, especially the shorter original memes and one liners.
I didn't mine the token, I invested as content creator in the platform but I also invested in myself here. I do want the power to draw both attention and rewards to myself, and I forfeited my established curation trail on short content as good faith. Basically I'm concentrating on making content that can be comparable with the viral memes on facebook and reddit. Maybe I'm not quite there yet, but probably not that far off. The quality of the post shouldn't be gauged by its length, but the impact it inflicts on its readers. And doing it relatively well is not easy. So I stand by my own works and the votes I cast on them.
I hope in the future, people here don't equate length with quality and are less reluctant to vote big on really short content that was impactful, rather than just reserving it for dull and long winded posts that required no talent at all and were only drawn out for the sole purpose of showing that effort was involved.
It's entirely possibly that you're correct, or remotely possible that every writer has their niche.....I've seen a 100K worded book gross a billion (some obscure prisoner of azkaban story by some anonymous J.K. Rowlings), but I still haven't seen a mime hit a million.
Still pound for pound or word for word. I would say your quick zaps are pretty good....I just wish there was an app or function in steemit to bring your work forward as some kind of *priority trail over others as I don't see them unless i scroll down a hundred post in my feed till I spot yours.
yes that is how I mastered using my mouse as a zoom-zoom little car...sometimes I even drive it all around my pretty pink laptop and imagine I'm a le mans grand prix racecourse champion
ok...so in the spirit of keeping things
brief/shorter/medium length and sweet, I'll just say:please continue to mix it up.....yes, do lots of short ones, and upvote yourself like mad cause all the noobs still don't know how to invest in themselves with Steem so most will not notice and when they do you already have you hooks into their funny bone and they will wonderfully accept it as underpaying yourself
but also continue todo....medium to lengthy ones for the patron of distinguish taste (that 1300 was breathtaking..I think I convince a friend who didn't know what Steem was to join just by reading that post). Cause these are the ones that I believe should be the standard for doing an auto upvote which I plan todo when I figured out how to anonymously buy btc without meeting up in back alleys.
compile something book worthy....or something that can be moved onto tv (like a cartoon character).....start an adventure of some crazy character called Trafalgar or Traf for short.....that's a total original nickname that I came up with ;P ...heck, I already seen his persona coming to life just reading your materials for last 3 weeks....he could be like the Neil Strauss but instead of putting it into a book that sounds 'How to Have Make Love Like a Porn Star'....it would be more an adventure of 'How to Invest in Steem and Become A RockStar'
ok..I'm going to stop here....I just realize who am I to be giving advise to a real writer when I have yet to even post 1 single blog.....gosh I'm still a Steemit virgin
Oh well....I tried upvoting by tossing you a goat, only cause I can't lift a cow. but that damn minnowbooster refused my precious sbd (cause they no longer upvote comments or some excuse)...so I will point it at your last post at @trafalga. Thanks for sharing....I learn a thing or two today, much oblige.
I think you're not understanding the full implications of the app. The decentralization is what enables the app to have the incentive structures that it does. The incentive structures is what makes the app potentially more effective than something like OKCupid. The problem is matching people up is not a process which favors a centralized approach.
People typically rely on their friends, or people they know to (friend of a friend) to introduce them to new people they might want to know. If you don't know anyone then you cannot take advantage of this method at all. With this app you don't have to know anyone to take advantage of a similar mechanism.
I don't have to know you to introduce you to people worthwhile to you because I'll have the incentive to make the introduction. This means you don't have to go to endless conferences, or join clubs, or gangs, or cliques, or any of that. The person you need to know will potentially always be easier to find. And this also applies to businesses looking to recruit people who would be the greatest asset to their company.
Can you do a dating service without a blockchain? Sure you can. But it would give too much power to whichever central authority runs the dating service over the participants using the service. It would take away privacy which people might want, it would make it hard or impossible to have incentives, it wouldn't work as well in my opinion because I don't think friendship, love, or finding employees/clients/peers is a centralized process today. Can you name a centralized service which effectively does this that we can all use equally with privacy? Is there any incentive for people to share their social wealth in centralized services?
nice post @dana-edwards
Hi @Dana-Edwards,
Thank you for the enlightening exposure of how blockchain could be used as an ingredient to improve human interconnection and to match up relationships. Your positive assumptive of value is interesting, someday, I can imagine:
Contributors writing specialize algorithms in blockchain contract customized to match specific individuals and groups in society, and providing that service to different niches in the decentralized matching eco-sphere. Imagine an artist/creator who work with pain and adventures of the joys of jealousy (a brunch of cuckolding perhaps?) themed story/graphics....and gets followed by a multitudes of followers privately or openly in their block-chain discord-ques that allows a hybrid of open or hidden connection.
Have 100% privacy of knowledge shared and can keep the knowledge private (like a hash/lock on all of one own's portion of contributed data no matter if its in chat/pictures/access-to-follow between one to and another, or one to many) at will and anytime, of course without any centralized knowledge being able to be bought or own by any 1 person. Imagine this being done for a community, a consensus based economic human behavioral network where a group can choose inclusion but evolved so that sub-groups have privacy to grow naturally. Think like elite good looking people dating, forking or splintering to a subgroup that match looks with intelligence, and forks with another subgroup that matches good looks and intelligence with 3some of a patron sugar momma or sugar-daddy with worldly wisdom (think the most interesting man in the world).....and another that softforks to match all 3 with a great cook...haha (why not) :)
Using a creepy example to illustrate, 1 & 2 alone will change the dynamics of how mild-stalking/admirers works on social media, where even stalkers/lurkers need to add value which will not work with true privacy for the stalker/lurker/adored-target in places like facebroke...and I can see how this will reduce/change the allure of centralized networking in favor of a decentralized one.
There is a need to be a common group of desire off set with convenience we have yet to identify, and in this agreed like mindedness of the pioneers (like Steemians) to progress forward....then this change may be here to stay. We are all evolving in knowledge, changing our choices, so it would be interesting to see a blockchain as a support technology that allows a system to innovate in pace with the face of changing definition of humanity.
Ok...why am I writing this? Oh yeah, I think you should do a repost of this and somehow include some of the deeper points in your understanding and perhaps even add some of these hair-brain ideas in the comments/reply to nurture a deeper discussion.
I really enjoy reading your respond....well done.