this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
1050 points (96.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

8406 readers
2253 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 65 points 2 days ago (8 children)

I’ve been curious if a government-run dating app could do better - if its goal is to achieve genuine engagement, not cycles of frustration that boost subscription rates.

This is one of many subjects where capitalist concern ruins the product (and that’s not even something I say as often as others on Lenny)

[–] kadup@lemmy.world 88 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Honestly, 90% of the need for dating apps would vanish if people had more free time away from work and well-kept public spaces for entertainment that didn't expect you to purchase anything.

So rather than a government-run dating app, how about a government-sanctioned 4 day work week and well kept public parks?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Yet again, low-density exclusionary zoning causing car-dependency (which is why the "third spaces" you're talking about have all-but disappeared) is revealed as the root cause of almost every problem we have.

[–] Lifecoach5000@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I don’t know if I buy that. I think people simply like hiding behind a screen for many interactions these days - including dating.

Not that Im against your idea but maybe just the 90% part seems inflated.

[–] kadup@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps, but we would need to put the idea in practice to determine what's the cause/effect relationship here.

Are people more addicted to their screens because the real world became hostile, or is the real world becoming hostile because people are glued to their screens?

I'd bet on the first option, but I could be wrong.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 2 points 2 days ago

Real relationships require a vulnerability that dating apps can not provide

[–] Kage520@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

I love my screen time but if there was free ping pong somewhere outside or something I'd go there a lot. Same for rock climbing, board game spaces... I'd get out for a lot. Screen time is a cheap substitute for this real stuff.

[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But who makes the profit in your silly goose scenario? Somebody has to be making money or it's a terrible idea!

[–] Forester@pawb.social 1 points 2 days ago

This is what we call long-term investment a taxman wins once you have kids

[–] turtlesareneat@discuss.online 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I run a social club for gay men, and we've talked about coming up with an app that's run by a non-profit, with social workers on the board, that's designed to actually connect people, not keep them glued to the app. Friendship, dates, activity partners, whatever.

I don't know why no one has come up with the non-profit model here but if I can get enough steam, we're doing it.

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

But even non-profits need to pay for operating costs like salary and cloud fees. Where would you get the funding for that?

[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The app doesn't need to be free, and the revenue stream won't dry up if it actually works because people break up, and there are so many fucking people that even in a zero sum scenario it would take forever to reach saturation.

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Sorry if I come off like a butthole but I'm both curious yet dubious of the idea. I feel like people probably have thought about it but they probably ran into the same problems you'll run into.

You didn't quite answer my question. Where are you getting revenue? Eg. Subscription, one-time fees for X, grants, investments, etc?

Duallingo started like a non-profit but even their revenue with its massive userbase couldn't cover their expenses so they had to compromise hard to keep the lights on. The same happened to Coffee Meets Bagel. Hinge started with the same premise of "this app is meant to be deleted" but they also had to compromise and eventually sold to Match Group.

Also, I feel like gay men are a unique demographic that has higher that average engagement so Grindr is probably in a uniquely advantaged position to resist enshitification.

I guess I'm just saying it's probably in practice a cost center like city infrastructure or schools or research, so it might only work without heavy compromises if it's also funded by taxes.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Where are we getting the funds for Lemmy and its instances?

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Donations and many self hosted volunteers, helped by the unique nature of the fediverse architecture also distributing burdens, fewer users, and lower computation/storage/availability requirements (compared to a more centralized service like a dating app).

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It’s almost as if men are a little bit hornier than women…

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

That's an outdated, lazy, and inaccurate generalization.

Women are just as horny as men but straight women experience higher risks engaging in dating than gay men experience resulting in more caution and selectivity engagement.

Straight women who are able to have as much sex as they want tend to be those who are in stable, long-term relationships. The bottleneck is safety as a hard requirement for sex.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, maybe we need to define horny, this may be a semantics issue,

But no, you’re very wrong. In general men are way more horny, but we may be looking for different things to solve the horniness issue…

Men's sex drive is not only consistently higher than women's, but it is more consistent over time and more consistent across individuals as well

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago) (1 children)

I feel like you haven't provided any reasoning and evidence to support your opinion besides, "This is what I see from my perspective so that must be true at large."

It seems to me that you're implicitly defining horniess with a narrow interpretation of sex drive: how often people think about sex, which men very well may. To that I go back to my original point that using that to make claims is an outdated, overly simplistic, and lazy generalization. It's one that isn't very insightful and one that offers little utility.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago)

Yea we can maybe try to define some of the words etc, I understand what you’re saying…

Gay couples have more sex than hetero couples who have more sex than lesbian couples

Men think about sex more, men masturbate more, men visit prostitutes more, men look at more porn,

How are we going to define horny?

I do understand that women throughout history have had their sexuality policed, and that women do in general care more about relationships and the emotional intimacy before they can fully enjoy sex, etc… but still, men are way hornier…

All of these statements are general for the group of men and women, not specific to any individual, obviously there are specific women who are more horny than specific men

I also don’t think it’s a bad thing if it is in fact true that men are hornier, it’s just part of being human… there are natural differences between men and women and that’s okay! 😊

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You said capitalism and summoned your resident anticapitalist. How can I be of assistance, comrade. :D

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Looking for an anticapitalist on lemmy is like looking for a lesbian at a Teagan and Sara concert. It's not everybody, but it's not a difficult search

meh, I dont think thats accurate. I would say "opportunist" is a better fit. Anticapitalists understand how profit extractions works and have a very different view on society. Mostly one that does not work on .world because of the capitalist propaganda machine running in the west.

[–] Simulation6@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

National Lampoon had an article once called 'Girls of the Soviet Block'. When you said government run dating app, it made me think how hilarious that turned out.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This isn't what was suggested here at all.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago

That's how it'll end up though.

Although with all the Nazism going on in Silicon Valley, there's a good chance that's what they've been attempting all along.

[–] CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

"App" and "genuine engagement" are 2 things that don't go together.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I can't wait for TRUMPDate. Make America Date Again. Can't go wrong.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Someone tried this with a dating app for right-wingers only called "The Right Stuff", which has faced significant criticism for lacking female users.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Enter the colour of your skin:

Whoops, no matches for you!

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

yes, and women will be required to use it and have babies with the incels on it.

Its that or prison, ladies!

[–] Vandals_handle@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

But the date is August 2, 1934

[–] Pechente@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago

I would prefer something defederated over government owned.