I have a 7 pillars strategy and a List of Firsts.

 I have a 7 pillars strategy and a List of Firsts.
The 7 pillars strategy to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry.

1- Lawyers: Since some years ago I had been assisting lawyers who sue online dating sites for fake/inactive profiles, sending them screenshots and other valuable information. I continue and heavily incentivize them during 2013.

2- Consumers' Associations: Since some years ago I had been denouncing several online dating sites for fraud at several Consumers' Associations worldwide. I continue.

3- Journalists: I continually contact the writers / journalists who write articles in several newspapers/magazines sending them my point of view, saying why the entire Online Dating Industry for serious daters in 1st World Countries is a HOAX, performing as a Big Online Casino, with a low effectiveness/efficiency level of their matching algorithms (less than 10%).

4- Researchers: Since 2005 I had been heavily contacting Academics. All the new and fresh research is over my desk. Nearly all the Researchers know who I am.

5- Executives from old competitors and newbies: I had contacted all of them and they are very comfortable attracting, converting and retaining subscribers with automatic renewal of their subscriptions and other credit-card billing trickery, than offering a good compatibility matching method. It seems they really do not want to innovate.

6- Some dissatisfied daters from eHarmony, True, Meetic, Parship, Chemistry, PerfectMatch, PlentyOfFish, Be2, and other sites had been contacting me with complaints. I encourage them to denounce those dating sites in  Consumers' Associations.

7- Investors: I had been contacting them since 2001. They had been fascinated by social networking utilities and mobile applications but very few had invested in online dating sites. So I had contacted the ones which invested in them and I said "hey, you had wasted your money".

Fernando Ardenghi's List of Firsts:

First person in the World to say the entire Online Dating Industry in 1st World Countries is a HOAX.

First person in the World to say many Online Dating sites like eHarmony, PerfectMatch, Chemistry, PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor, MeeticAffinity, Parship, Be2 and others are performing as placebo, like patent medicine.

First person in the World to discover the Online Dating Sound Barrier problem.

First and Only person in the World to solve the Online Dating Sound Barrier problem.

First person in the World to suggest the normative 16PF5 test or similar like 15FQ+ to measure personality of daters instead of ipsative tests like PerfectMatch or Chemistry or other normative less powerful tests like the Big5.

First person in the World to say Online Dating sites should check if women are taking contraceptive pills or other hormonal therapy.

First person in the World to reverse engineering several online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods.

First person in the World to notice Personality Based Recommender Systems are like compatibility matching engines.

First person in the World to suggest Online Dating sites should show Compatibility Distribution Curves to every and each dater.

First person in the World to compile research about Theories of Romantic Relationship Development.

First person in the World to openly say Conferences for the Online Dating Industry like iDate and ODS are rubbish.

Do you think you can innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry without taking into account the above list? No way.

------------------------------------------------------------
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven!

The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)

High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.


Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry
All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo. 

Online Dating Industry / WorldWide Market 2013 (March 2013)

ODIwm2013.pdf by Fernando Ardenghi

PAPER "Respondent rationale for neither agreeingnordisagreeing ..

"Respondent rationale for neither agreeingnordisagreeing: Person and item contributors to middle category endorsement intent on Likert personality indicators"

Abstract: The current study examines intentions behind middle category endorsement in personality assessment, and investigates person and item antecedents to these intentions. Participants verbally explained their responses to 100 personality items and completed personality, self-concept clarity, and cognitive ability measures. Talked through items were scaled with respect to clarity, complexity, and need for contextualization. Verbal protocols suggest that the predominant respondent orientation when selecting the Likert middle category is it depends. Candidate item and person antecedents indicate that middle category endorsement intentions are more closely attributable to item rather than respondent characteristics. These findings suggest that consecutive integer scoring algorithms may result in personality scale attenuation, particularly with instruments that contain indicators reflecting an ambiguous or unspecified context.

LikeIt (TheCompleteMe) social dating site, GAME OVER soon

Little birdie told me LikeIt (TheCompleteMe) social dating site, will be GAME OVER soon!

Social dating is vaporware. Online Dating for serious daters does not need to be more social, it needs to be more effective/efficient. It needs to reduce the false positives problem.
Innovations are not adding more bells and whistles to actual online dating sites.
The Online Dating Industry needs innovations but they will come from only one source: the latest discoveries in theories of romantic relationships development with commitment.
Compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.
STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY and not "meet other people with similar interests"

PAPER "On the similarity between exchangeable profiles .."

PAPER "On the similarity between exchangeable profiles: A psychometric model, analytic strategy, and empirical illustration"

ABSTRACT: Analyses of profile similarity are widespread in personality psychology, but their apparent simplicity masks difficult psychometric and statistical issues. We present a psychometric framework that addresses an important challenge (i.e., profile normativeness) in examinations of dyadic exchangeable profiles. In addition, we present an analytic strategy accounting for non-independence that often arises in analyses of profile similarity, facilitating integrated examinations of variables at dyadic and individual levels. An empirical analysis of personality similarity and relationship quality demonstrates that the model and analytic strategy can reveal novel psychological insights. These are important advances, as previous work has ignored exchangeable profiles and has failed to present an integrated psychometric and statistical framework for profile similarity.

Furr (2008) presented a psychometric model focusing on three concepts relevant in almost any examination of profile similarity.
Overall Similarity is the degree to which two profiles are similar to each other (with no adjustment for normativeness), computed as the correlation or covariance between two profiles.
Normativeness is the degree to which an individual profile is like an average profile (e.g., the degree to which a given wife is like the normative or average wife), and it is computed as the correlation or covariance between an individual's profile and a relevant "normative" profile of means. Normativeness is indexed independently for both partners in the dyad (i.e., how normative is partner 1's profile? How normative is partner 2's profile?).
Distinctive Similarity is a normatively-adjusted index reflecting the degree to which two profiles are uniquely similar to each other, in terms of the ways in which they are "distinct" from the average persons.

For online dating applications and personality based recommenders the above paper is not useful because daters are "distinguishable" instead of "exchangeable".

Similarity is a word that has different meanings for different persons or companies, it exactly depends on how mathematically is defined. I calculate overall similarity in personality patterns with (a proprietary) pattern recognition by correlation method. It takes into account the score and the trend to score of any pattern.

In compatibility matching methods there are 2 steps:
1) to objectively measure personality traits (with the 16PF5 test or similar) without distortion.
2) to calculate compatibility (personality similarity) between prospective mates

To calculate personality similarity between daters, the key is the ENSEMBLE!

BRA (#X/ means person #X's 16PF5 Report
KET /#Y) means person #Y's 16PF5 Report
/CQ/ means Comparison Operator

For person #X:: A:6.B:7.C:6.E:8.F:9.G:6.H:7.I:7.L:8.M:7.N:2.O:5.Q1:8.Q2:7.Q3:3.Q4:4
16 distinguishable particles in a one_dimensional box of length L and infinite outside the box with 10 quantized levels of energy (named box X)
distinguishable particle (A) Warmth at level "6"
distinguishable particle (B) Reasoning at level "7"
distinguishable particle (C) Emotional Stability at level "6"
distinguishable particle (E) Dominance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (F) Liveliness at level "9"
distinguishable particle (G) RuleConsciousness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (H) Social Boldness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (I) Sensitivity at level "7"
distinguishable particle (L) Vigilance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (M) Abstractedness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (N) Privateness at level "2"
distinguishable particle (O) Apprehension to Change at level "5"
distinguishable particle (Q1) Openness at level "8"
distinguishable particle (Q2) SelfReliance at level "7"
distinguishable particle (Q3) Perfectionism at level "3"
distinguishable particle (Q4) Tension at level "4"

And

For person #Y:: A:5.B:7.C:4.E:8.F:7.G:4.H:5.I:6.L:4.M:6.N:8.O:9.Q1:6.Q2:8.Q3:4.Q4:4
16 distinguishable particles in other one_dimensional box of length L and infinite outside the box with 10 quantized levels of energy (named box Y)
distinguishable particle (A) Warmth at level "5"
distinguishable particle (B) Reasoning at level "7"
distinguishable particle (C) Emotional Stability at level "4"
distinguishable particle (E) Dominance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (F) Liveliness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (G) RuleConsciousness at level "4"
distinguishable particle (H) Social Boldness at level "5"
distinguishable particle (I) Sensitivity at level "6"
distinguishable particle (L) Vigilance at level "4"
distinguishable particle (M) Abstractedness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (N) Privateness at level "8"
distinguishable particle (O) Apprehension to Change at level "9"
distinguishable particle (Q1) Openness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (Q2) SelfReliance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (Q3) Perfectionism at level "4"
distinguishable particle (Q4) Tension at level "4"

Each quantized level is associated with a probability density function.
(#X/CQ/#Y) is the sum of the comparisons between different states, the sum of partial probabilities.
(#X/CQ/#Y) == 74.79865772%
Read as the pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 74.79865772% similar to the pattern 5.7.4.8.7.4.5.6.4.6.8.9.6.8.4.4

Online Dating sites and Personality Based recommenders have very big databases, in the range of 20 000 000 (twenty million) profiles, so the Big 5 model is not enough for predictive purposes.
If they use the Big 5 model, the whole precision is less than you could achieve searching by your own!!!
NORMATIVE personality tests like Big5 versions used at PlentyOfFish, eHarmony , Meetic Affinity, Parship, Be2, True are good for guidance (orientation) purposes but not good enough for predictive purposes.
"Because the Big Five groups the more specific primary-level factors, feedback organized around the five Global Factor scales is more easily understood. For detailed feedback or predictive purposes, one should assess the more specific primary factors. Research has shown that more specific factors like the primary scales of the 16PF Questionnaire predict actual behavior better than the Big 5 Global Factors. For example, one extravert (a bold, fearless, high-energy type) may differ considerably from another (a sweet, warm, sensitive type), depending on the extraversion-related primary scale score patterns, so deeper analysis is typically warranted." Extracted from the 16PF5 Manual


 WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)
High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.
Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.


Please read also
How to calculate personality similarity between users .
An exercise of similarity.
How LIFEPROJECT METHOD calculates similarity. 
STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY by LIFEPROJECT METHOD.
Personality Distribution Curves using the NORMATIVE 16PF5.
ALGORITHMS & POWER CALCULATION.
Innovations: to take the 16PF5 test 3 times.
Why your brain distorts!

Match LATAM new CEO

Last 4th February 2013, Mr. Claudio Gandelman resigned as LATAM CEO.

The IAC HeadQuarters had sent Mr. Navin Ramachandran.

During the tenure of Mr. Gandelman (4 years) a bad taste commercial was made and aired during several months.

Two years ago, last February 2011, the former LATAM CEO said "Match Argentina claims 4 million Argentinean profiles, but admits they are only 1 million active profiles (not paying members, only active profiles).
[i.e. 75% of profiles at Match Argentina are useless at all, they are inactive]"

I had estimated IAC Personals' Latam revenue in the range of USD29 million, less than ...... PlentyOfFish.

Mr. Gandelman will be launching its new Internet Project (www dot OPIALL dot com ?) by May 2013.

How to calculate personality similarity between users

How to calculate personality similarity between users?
Short answer: the key is the ENSEMBLE!
(the whole set of different valid possibilities)

Similarity is a word that has different meanings for different persons or companies, it exactly depends on how mathematically is defined. I calculate similarity in personality patterns with (a proprietary) pattern recognition by correlation method. It takes into account the score and the trend to score of any pattern.

Using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 then the ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is in the range of 7.0 * 10E9 (estimated MARCH 2013)
  
(7.0 * 10E9) / 10E16 == 7.0 * 10E(-7) or 0.7 * 10E(-6) or 0.70 micro part!
All World Population is 0.70 micropart of the ensemble of the 16PF5 normative test.

e.g.the 16PF5 Brazilian version, in Portuguese for Brazil and the Norm for Brazil (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Brazil).
Brazil population is in the range of 190 million persons, 190 * 10E6 == 1.9 * 10E8.
demographic characteristics of Brazil 47.73% White, 43.13% Brown (Multiracial), 7.61% Black, 1.09% Asian, 0.43% Amerindian
(1.9 * 10E8)/ 10E16 == 1.9 * 10E(-8) or 0.019 * 10E(-6) or 0.019 micro part!
Brazilian population is 0.019 micro part of the 16PF5's ensemble. You can not use simple regression equations to calculate similarity between quantized patterns because:
* women will "see" men as all the same.
* men will "see" women as all the same.

The output of the 16PF5 test are 16 variables STens (Standard Tens) taking integer values from 1 to 10. STens divide the score scale into ten units.
STens have the advantage that they enable results to be thought of in terms of bands of scores, rather than absolute raw scores. These bands are narrow enough to distinguish statistically significant differences between candidates, but wide enough not to over emphasize minor differences between candidates.



Suppose you are citizen of country "A" where speed limit is 70mph and the population drives at
65 mph average with 2mph standard deviation (some persons always surpass the speed limit) in a normal distribution,
and you are tested driving at 67 mph so you are OVER the average in 1 standard deviation, you are at 84.1344% over the whole population.
You will score 8 or 9 in a sten scale depending on how it was constructed. You will be seen as VERY HIGH in that scale.

If you drive in country "B" where speed limit is 75mph and the population drives at
71 mph average with 2mph standard deviation (some persons always surpass the speed limit) in a normal distribution,
and you are tested  again driving at 67 mph,  you are UNDER the average in 2 standard deviation, you are at 02.2751% under the whole population.
You will score 1 in a sten scale. You will be seen as VERY LOW in that scale.

That is why normative tests can not simply be translated, because you need the norm for that test, and that norm is actualized each and every time Census Figures are released
The 16PF5 test is available in
- English for the United States and the Norm for the United States (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United States).
- English for Canada and the Norm for Canada (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Canada)
- English for the United Kingdom and the Norm for the United Kingdom (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United Kingdom).
- English for Australia and the Norm for Australia (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Australia).
- French for France and the Norm for France.
- German for Germany and the Norm for Germany.
- Spanish for Spain and the Norm for Spain.
- Italian for Italy and the Norm for Italy.
and many more "With over 60 years of research and application behind it, the 16PF5 has become internationally well known and respected, with over 20 different translated versions."

eHarmony, True, PerfectMatch, MeeticAffinity, Parship, Be2, PlentyOfFish, Chemistry and others like them are in the range of 3 to 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened. Any member of those sites receives on average 3 to 4 prospective mates as compatible for dating purposes per 1,000 (one thousand) members screened in the database. So in a 10,000,000 women database, any man will see 30,000 to 40,000 women as highly compatible; 30,000 women is the population of an average small city. Any person can achieve 3 to 4 persons as highly compatible per 1,000 persons screened, searching by his/her own or by mutual filtering methods!

eHarmony , True, PerfectMatch, MeeticAffinity, Parship, Be2, PlentyOfFish, Chemistry and others have a low effectiveness/efficiency level of their matching algorithms.
The Online Dating Industry does not need a 10% improvement, a 50% improvement or a 100% improvement. It does need "a 100 times better improvement"
LIFEPROJECT METHOD is like the Teller Ulam design for recommender systems and the Online Dating Industry.



Please read also
An exercise of similarity.
How LIFEPROJECT METHOD calculates similarity. 
STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY by LIFEPROJECT METHOD.
Personality Distribution Curves using the NORMATIVE 16PF5.
ALGORITHMS & POWER CALCULATION.
Innovations: to take the 16PF5 test 3 times.
Why your brain distorts!

------------------------------

The 3 milestone discoveries of the 2001 - 2010 decade for Theories of Romantic Relationships Development are: 
I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. "Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle"
II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences are useless) 
III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment. Also there is a similarity trilogy between genetic, mate choice and personality based recommender systems. Personality Based Recommender Systems are the next generation of recommender systems because they perform far better than Behavioural ones (past actions and pattern of personal preferences)
That is the only way to improve recommender systems, to include the personality traits of their users. They need to calculate personality similarity between users but  there are different formulas to calculate similarity.
In case you did not notice, recommender systems are morphing to .......... compatibility matching engines, as the same used in the Online Dating Industry since years, with low success rates!!! because they mostly use the Big5 to assess personality and the Pearson correlation coefficient to calculate similarity.
Please remember: Personality traits are highly stable in persons over 25 years old to 45 years old.

In compatibility matching methods there are 2 steps:
1) to objectively measure personality traits or other human variables (with the 16PF5 test) without distortion.
2) to calculate compatibility between prospective mates 

IPSATIVE personality tests are OBSOLETE (self-descriptive questionnaires) and should be discarded: MBTI (PerfectMatch), DISC (ThomasKnowsPeople), Enneagram (Dopasowani) or other proprietary ipsative tests like the ones used at Chemistry, ButterfliesAgain, Doskonalapara, PembePanjur, LittleHint, oneGoodLove and others.

NORMATIVE personality tests like Big5 versions used at PlentyOfFish, eHarmony , Meetic Affinity, Parship, Be2, True are good for guidance (orientation) purposes but not good enough for predictive purposes.
"Because the Big Five groups the more specific primary-level factors, feedback organized around the five Global Factor scales is more easily understood. For detailed feedback or predictive purposes, one should assess the more specific primary factors. Research has shown that more specific factors like the primary scales of the 16PF Questionnaire predict actual behavior better than the Big 5 Global Factors. For example, one extravert (a bold, fearless, high-energy type) may differ considerably from another (a sweet, warm, sensitive type), depending on the extraversion-related primary scale score patterns, so deeper analysis is typically warranted." Extracted from the 16PF5 Manual


 WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)
High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.
Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.

 

NEW paper: Assortative Mating and Personality in Human Couples

"Assortative Mating and Personality in Human Couples: A Study Using Cloninger's Temperament and Character Inventory"

ABSTRACT

The trend toward assortative mating is the rule in Western societies for a large series of factors. The case for personality variables is however not clear, since weak and even negative relationships have been found in correlation analyses between spouses. The present study compared the profiles of members from 145 stable couples living together for more than 5 years, and representative of the Belgian population. Personality measurements were performed using Cloninger's Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI), in order to: 1) determine whether the subject's TCI predicts the partner's profile; 2) determine whether modeling has an important influence between the partners; 3) describe the behavior of personalities with extreme traits; 4) measure whether personalities with extreme traits would favor complementarity over homogamy. In all dimensions but Harm Avoidance and its sub-dimensions, positive associations were found between the partners, indicating a trend toward assortative mating. These differences were significant for Novelty Seeking, Reward Dependence, Persistence and Cooperativeness. Trends were observed in Self-Directedness and Self-Transcendence. Subjects with extreme personality traits were not shown to favor complementarity over assortative mating. Homogamy was thus confirmed here for a series of personality traits, independently of the TCI Temperament or Character classification and on the subjects position in the distribution.


Please remember personality = temperament + character
Personality is composed of two basic types of traits:
traits that an individual acquires, dimensions of character;
and
traits with biological underpinnings, dimensions of temperament (Cloninger 1987).




Please also see the German paper: "Only the congruent survive - Personality similarities in couples. Personality and Individual Differences" and "Perceptions of Ideal and Former Partners' Personality and Similarity" where the authors has written:
"Our findings strongly support the 'similarity-attraction' hypothesis: Individuals clearly desire a potential partner with a similar personality.
In addition to finding a mate with a similar personality, our study showed that individuals seek a mate who is slightly 'better' than they are: They prefer a mate who is somewhat less neurotic, more agreeable, more conscientious, more open and more extraverted than they are themselves.
.... mismatches in personality are a frequently mentioned cause for relationship break-up. If former partners indeed have dissimilar personalities, our findings underline how difficult it is for many people to select a mate with a similar personality, or, alternatively, how little value individuals put on finding a similar partner in terms of personality.

The present study's results, as well as the results found in previous studies (e.g., Eastwick & Finkel, 2008), may be used to educate people, especially singles, about what really matters in long-term relationships, for instance, similarity in personality, instead of complementarity."

Latest Research in Theories of Romantic Relationships Development shows: compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity** between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
*Although no actual fresh paper uses the 16PF normative personality test (they mostly use different versions of the normative Big5 personality test instead) and linear or logistic multivariate regression equations to calculate similarity, they clearly show a connection between personality similarity and marital happiness / dyadic success (stability and satisfaction) for some persons.
**Similarity is a word that has different meanings for different persons or companies, it exactly depends on how mathematically is defined.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)
High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.
Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.

What comes after Social Networking?
My bet: The Next Big Investment Opportunity on the Internet will be …. Personalization!
Personality Based Recommender Systems and Strict Personality Based Compatibility Matching Engines for serious Online Dating with the normative 16PF5 personality test. 
 

PAPER "Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior"

PAPER "Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior"
"The study is based on a sample of 58,466 volunteers from the United States, obtained through the myPersonality Facebook application, which included their Facebook profile information, a list of their Likes (n = 170 Likes per person on average), psychometric test scores, and survey information."

"People of different personalities like different things. .... Thanks to PreferenceTool (f.k.a.LikeAudience) we can check what is the average personality profile of someone who follows any of the hundreds of thousands of likes they store in their database.
In order to estimate your score, we first record your likes. Then we check what is the typical personality of the people who like each of the things that you like. Based on that, we estimate your profile by adding up the profiles of your likes. If most of the things you like are liked by liberal people, it is quite likely that you are also liberal. "

"We believe that that our One Click Personality Test is revolutionary. As opposed to traditional methods of psychometric assessment, it:

 *   is extremely quick; there are no questions at all!
 *  has real world validity; we do not use a personality test that asks you about your real-world behaviour - we look at your actual Facebook behaviour" and I add: that is the WEAK point of the whole research! Please remember Big5 versions  are good for guidance (for orientation) purposes but not good enough for predictive purposes. Since the traits which compose the Big Five model are relatively broad, they are not nearly as predictive and accurate for explaining human behavior as some of the more abundant, specific traits.

REMEMBER: ALL indirect methods to assess personality add a lot of distortion!
----------------------------------------------

Which is the RIGHT approach to innovate in the Personality Based Recommender Systems Arena?
The same approach to innovate in the Online Dating Industry == 16PF5 test or similar to assess personality traits and a new method to calculate similarity between quantized patterns. Oh that is exactly ............ guess ............. yes ........ LIFEPROJECT METHOD, ready since 2001! 

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 (five thousand) online dating sites they can be classified as:
1.0: "Browsing/Searching Options, Powerful Searching Engines"  "You can fastly search for the person you want, but most probably that person does not exist or does not want to meet you because you are not compatible with him/her."
1.5: "Unidirectional Recommendation Engines"
2.0: "Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engines"
3.0: "Compatibility Matching Algorithms"
Compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.
STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY and not "meet other people with similar interests"
The 3 milestone discoveries of the 2001 - 2010 decade for Theories of Romantic Relationships Development are: I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. "Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle" II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences are useless) III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
Also there is a similarity trilogy between genetic, mate choice and personality based recommender systems.
Personality Based Recommender Systems are the next generation of recommender systems because they perform FAR better than Behavioural ones (past actions and pattern of personal preferences)
That is the only way to improve recommender systems, to include the personality traits of their users. They need to calculate personality similarity between users but  there are different formulas to calculate similarity.
In case you did not notice, recommender systems are morphing to .......... compatibility matching engines, as the same used in the Online Dating Industry since years, with low success rates!!! because they mostly use the Big5 to assess personality and the Pearson correlation coefficient to calculate similarity.
Please remember: Personality traits are highly stable in persons over 25 years old to 45 years old.
 
In compatibility matching methods there are 2 steps:
1) to objectively measure personality traits or other human variables (with the 16PF5 test) without distortion.
2) to calculate compatibility between prospective mates 

IPSATIVE personality tests are OBSOLETE (self-descriptive questionnaires) and should be discarded: MBTI (PerfectMatch), DISC (ThomasKnowsPeople), Enneagram (Dopasowani) or other proprietary ipsative tests like the ones used at Chemistry, ButterfliesAgain, Doskonalapara, PembePanjur, LittleHint, oneGoodLove and others.

NORMATIVE personality tests like Big5 versions used at PlentyOfFish, eHarmony , Meetic Affinity, Parship, Be2, True are good for guidance (orientation) purposes but not good enough for predictive purposes.
"Because the Big Five groups the more specific primary-level factors, feedback organized around the five Global Factor scales is more easily understood. For detailed feedback or predictive purposes, one should assess the more specific primary factors. Research has shown that more specific factors like the primary scales of the 16PF Questionnaire predict actual behavior better than the Big 5 Global Factors. For example, one extravert (a bold, fearless, high-energy type) may differ considerably from another (a sweet, warm, sensitive type), depending on the extraversion-related primary scale score patterns, so deeper analysis is typically warranted." Extracted from the 16PF5 Manual
Normative tests can not simply be translated, because you need the norm for that test, and that norm is actualized each and every time Census Figures are released
The 16PF5 test is available in
- English for the United States and the Norm for the United States (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United States).
- English for Canada and the Norm for Canada (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Canada)
- English for the United Kingdom and the Norm for the United Kingdom (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United Kingdom).
- English for Australia and the Norm for Australia (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Australia).
- French for France and the Norm for France.
- German for Germany and the Norm for Germany.
- Spanish for Spain and the Norm for Spain.
- Italian for Italy and the Norm for Italy.
and many more "With over 60 years of research and application behind it, the 16PF5 has become internationally well known and respected, with over 20 different translated versions."

The output of the 16PF5 test are 16 variables STens (Standard Tens) taking integer values from 1 to 10. STens divide the score scale into ten units.
STens have the advantage that they enable results to be thought of in terms of bands of scores, rather than absolute raw scores. These bands are narrow enough to distinguish statistically significant differences between candidates, but wide enough not to over emphasize minor differences between candidates.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)
High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.
Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.

What comes after Social Networking?
My bet: The Next Big Investment Opportunity on the Internet will be …. Personalization!
Personality Based Recommender Systems and Strict Personality Based Compatibility Matching Engines for serious Online Dating with the normative 16PF5 personality test. 
 

Zoosk hacked / another hacking incident

ArsTechnica had recently reported Zoosk was hacked.

(A screenshot obtained from ArsTechnica - from Jeremi Gosney showing passwords cracked by the ocl-Hashcat-plus program.)
Year over year the same history: They know it was Zoosk because when security analysts decrypted some of those passwords, they found phrases such as "logmein2zoosk", "zoosk password", "myzooskpass","@zoosk", "zoosk4me", "ilovezoosk", "flirtzoosk" and "zooskmail". Perhaps they had called Zoosk to tell them!

Remember last year eHarmony? When several security analysts decrypted some of those stolen passwords, they found the combination HARMONY or EHARMONY or patterns of either (d=digit): ddEHARMdd, ddddEHARM, or EHARMdddd, and guess, perhaps they had called eHarmony to tell them, but of course, as every hacking incident, all the rubbish was swept under the carpet.
eHarmony's Team had not solved nothing. 

The “Russian mafia” again???
Who could benefit most from that situation? As if they were in the cold war era.

Several online dating sites, like PlentyOfFish and eHarmony HAD BEEN ALERTED IN ADVANCE, since 2009 about security holes, but they had not paid the attention it deserved. 

GoodBye eHarmony GoodBye!

GoodBye eHarmony GoodBye, soon!

eSynchrony, 3 years membership.

eSynchrony (Singapore / Malaysia / Hong Kong) offers a 3 years membership.

I reviewed that site before, is has nearly no traffic at all.

eSynchrony is like a copycat of eHarmony, a compatibility matching method that is a HOAX.

 It seems anyone can copycat eHarmony because it is a 12+ years old obsolete site.

Patents for the Online Dating Industry

Knowledge-based companies always need intangible-assets to show in their balances as part of their valuation. (Many investors / investment rules require it) although some of those online dating and social networking patents could be in the category of "bogus patents"

One of the old tricks to make_up a balance sheet is to appreciate intangible assets.

They had patented each and every stupidity they thought (in USA), and now it seems the patenting era had reached an end.


WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven!
The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)

Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry
All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.