Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Divorce at eHarmony: Verba game over.

Divorce at eHarmony: Verba game over. Before leaving he said "I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished in the time that I’ve been here. We have a site redesign in beta and improving every day; we are on our way to a new creative campaign scheduled to launch later this quarter ...."

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

I had reviewed over 55 compatibility matching engines intended for serious dating since 2003, when I had discovered “the online dating sound barrier” problem.
eHarmony’s Team is very comfortable attracting, converting and retaining subscribers with automatic renewal of their subscriptions and other credit-card billing trickery. They really do not want to innovate.
Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates, have less or at least the same precision as searching on one’s own. [in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened]
* That is because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.
 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.
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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 Tunguska event was an enormously powerful explosion that occurred in what is now Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia, at about 0:14 UT on June 30 1908. The explosion is believed to have been caused by the air burst of a large meteoroid or comet fragment at an altitude of 5–10 kilometres (3–6 mi) above the Earth’s surface.
The energy of the blast was nearly 15 megatons of TNT roughly equal to the United States’ Castle Bravo thermonuclear bomb tested on March 1, 1954; about 1,000 times more powerful than the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan (codenamed  Little Boy).
The idea of a thermonuclear fusion bomb ignited by a smaller fission bomb was first proposed by Enrico Fermi to his colleague Edward Teller in 1941 at the start of what would become the Manhattan Project.
Other prominent scientists openly recommended building nuclear bombs more powerful than the standard pure-fission model. Their assumption was that critical mass considerations would limit the potential size of fission explosions, but that a fusion explosion could be as large as its supply of fuel, which has no critical mass limit.
In January 1951, Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam invented radiation-powered ablation-drive implosion.
The Teller–Ulam design is the nuclear weapon design concept used in most of the world’s multi-megaton-range thermonuclear weapons;  a 1,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima’s Little Boy. In most applications the bulk of its destructive energy comes from uranium fission, not hydrogen/deuterium/tritium  fusion
Its essential features, which officially remained secret for nearly three decades, are:
1) separation of stages into a triggering “primary” explosive and a much more powerful “secondary” explosive
2) compression of the secondary by X-rays coming from nuclear fission in the primary, a process called the “radiation implosion” of the secondary,
3) heating of the secondary, after cold compression, by a second fission explosion inside the secondary.
The Online Dating Industry needs a very powerful algorithm like the “Teller Ulam design”. In this case 100 times more powerful than actual matching algorithms.
Breaking “the online dating sound barrier” is to achieve at least:
3 most compatible persons in a 100,000 persons database.
12 most compatible persons in a 1,000,000 persons database.
48 most compatible persons in a 10,000,000 persons database.
100 times better than Compatibility Matching Algorithms used by actual online dating sites!
The only way to achieve that 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. The ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is nearly 7.0 * 10E9 (estimated OCT 2011)
- expressing compatibility with eight decimals, like The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 92.55033557%  +/- 0.00000001% similar to the pattern 7.7.6.8.8.7.6.5.8.7.4.5.7.7.3.4
Using a quantized pattern comparison method (part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation) to calculate similarity between prospective mates.
That is the only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry.
All other proposals are ………….. NOISE and perform as placebo.

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

IAC's Q2 2012 results (and Meetic)


The IAC had increased its paid subscribers database thanks to acquiring companies, like SinglesNet, Meetic, OkCupid and others, but if they acquire is a sign they can not innovate.


Q2 2012 showed a decrease comparing Q1 2012, the same for Meetic


Paid subscribers Q1 2012: 2,821,000 (includes the ones from Meetic Group)
Paid subscribers Q2 2012: 2,787,000 (includes the ones from Meetic Group) and IAC says 750,000 paid subscribers from Meetic.
 (Meetic, which has been consolidated since September 1, 2011, had 844 thousand paid subscribers in Q2 2011.)



 For Meetic:
"Revenue for the 1st half of 2012 totalled 82.0 million euros, and integrates a 13.2% decrease in the number of subscribers, which totalled 733,158 at 30th June."


Two papers debunking Behavioural recommender systems

In a previous post I has written about "Two papers debunking speeddating for serious dating"
"Why Mate Choices are not as Reciprocal as we Assume: The Role of Personality, Flirting and Physical Attractiveness" (2010)
"From Dating to Mating and Relating: Predictors of Initial and Long-Term Outcomes of Speed-Dating in a Community Sample" (2010)

Dr. Paul Eastwick had written 2 fresh interesting papers:
"Perceived, not actual, similarity predicts initial attraction in a live romantic context: Evidence from the speed-dating paradigm"
The "similarity-attraction" effect stands as one of the most well-known findings in social psychology. However, some research contends that perceived but not actual similarity influences attraction. The current study is the first to examine the effects of actual and perceived similarity simultaneously during a face-to-face initial romantic encounter. Participants attending a speed-dating event interacted with ∼12 members of the opposite sex for 4 min each. Actual and perceived similarity for each pair were calculated from questionnaire responses assessed before the event and after each date. Data revealed that perceived, but not actual, similarity significantly predicted romantic liking in this speed-dating context. Furthermore, perceived similarity was a far weaker predictor of attraction when assessed using specific traits rather than generally.


"Do Ideal Partner Preferences Predict Divorce? A Tale of Two Metrics"
Though people report idiosyncratic desires for particular traits in an ideal romantic partner, few studies have examined whether these ideals predict important long-term relationship outcomes. The present 3.5-year longitudinal study of newlywed couples used survival analysis to investigate whether the match between participants' ideal preferences and the traits they perceive in their partner predict the likelihood of divorce. Results depended entirely on whether the match was conceptualized as a match in level (e.g., high ideal preference for a trait with the presence of the trait in the partner) or in pattern (e.g., the within-person correlation of ideals with a partner's traits across all traits). The match between the pattern of ideals and traits negatively predicted divorce with an effect size larger than most established divorce risk factors. However, the match in level was unrelated to divorce, suggesting that perspectives emphasizing ideals for the level of traits may encounter predictive validity problems.


In the paper "Perceptions of Ideal and Former Partners' Personality and Similarity" Pieternel Dijkstra / Dick P. H. Barelds / University of Groningen, The Netherlands
The authors had written
".... 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."


In case you had not understood the above, those papers are big punches to ......... Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences.


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.



WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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!
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.


Since several years ago, I had been hammering your head, drilling your brain with the personality similarity concept. Please notice I will continue with this policy for the next 10 years, until 2022 if necessary.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

PAPER: The effect of suspicious profiles on people recommenders

 Another useless paper for the Online Dating Industry:PAPER: "The effect of suspicious profiles on people recommenders"
As the world moves towards the social web, criminals also adapt their activities to these environments. Online dating websites, and more generally people recommenders, are a particular target for romance scams. Criminals create fake profiles to attract users who believe they are entering a relationship. Scammers can cause extreme harm to people and to the reputation of the website. This makes it important to ensure that recommender strategies do not favour fraudulent profiles over those of legitimate users. There is therefore a clear need to gain understanding of the sensitivity of recommender algorithms to scammers. We investigate this by (1) establishing a corpus of suspicious profiles and (2) assessing the effect of these profiles on the major classes of reciprocal recommender approaches: collaborative and content-based. Our findings indicate that collaborative strategies are strongly influenced by the suspicious profiles, while a pure content-based technique is not influenced by these users.

----------------------------
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%).
Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates, have less or at least the same precision as searching on one's own. [in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened]
* That is because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.

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.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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!
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.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Badoo, social discovering ?

Mark Brooks had recently interviewed Ms. Jessica Powell from Badoo.

Badoo is under fraud investigation in several countries.

Badoo uses dishonest tactics to increase its database, there are several fake profiles there.

Conversion rate is less than 1% in South American countries.

Badoo offers to pay using SMS via your cell phone, but there were (several) complaints about up to 8 hours of delay from when you send the SMS and your profile is set in top visibility.
Women do not like location awareness features because they feel being hunted by men.

People do not pay for social discovering, for finding new friends, they will pay only for high effective compatibility matching.
Online Dating for serious daters does not need to be more social, it needs to be more effective/efficient.

Monday, July 16, 2012

DIGG game over

Just an interesting article about how Digg is a cautionary tale for other websites.

The same could be applied to Chemistry, eHarmony or even PlentyOfFish, and many other online dating sites.

Friday, July 13, 2012

"When Romance Is a Click Away" article at WSJ

Dr. Eli Finkel was interviewed at Wall Street Journal. He co authored the paper "Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science"


---------------------------------------
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%).
Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates, have less or at least the same precision as searching on one's own. [in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened]
* That is because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.

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.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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!
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.



Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Featured Thesis: I'm Too Sexy For My Brands

I'm Too Sexy (Exciting, Sophisticated, and Sincere) For My Brands: Menstrual Cycle Effects on Attitudes Toward Brand Personalities


Hormonal changes across women's menstrual cycles are a determinant factor in the types of goods women will consume. During the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle women are more likely to spend money on clothing and beautification products. Conversely, in the luteal (non fertile) phase, women will consume more food and home related products (Durante et al., 2011; Saad and Stenstrom, 2012). The objective of this thesis is to extend past the research on menstrual cycle effects in a consumer setting and explore the relationship between menstrual cycle and brand personalities. It is posited that women will exhibit greater (lower) preferences for brands signalling ‘sexy’, ‘exciting’ and ‘sophisticated’ traits on fertile (luteal) days with a greater (lower) preference for ‘sincere’ brands on luteal (fertile) days. This relationship between menstrual cycle phase (fertile or luteal) and brand personalities is expected to be moderated by the specific individual differences of the participants, namely, with regards to relationship status, brand loyalty, and the participants' propensity to engage in brand signalling.
-------------------------------
The Online Dating Industry needs innovations and should take into account fresh research like 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"

Soul2Match, FindYourFaceMate and Digital Physiognomy

Several times I had reviewed Soul2Match, FindYourFaceMate, "FaceReader from Profiler1: Personality Traits analysis based on facial features." and other dating sites with biometric software which analyzes facial features and bone structure, helping to detect levels of soulmate love and friendship like the Digital Physiognomy software


Soul2Match, FaceReader and FindYourFaceMate are SCAMS, HOAXES

 The paper "Recognition of Psychological Characteristics from Face" is also useless for the Online Dating Industry.

Do you want to know why?
Here are the answers:

1) 
Profiling by music preferences to assess personality
video preferences to assess personality
color preferences to assess personality
bookmarks preferences to assess personality
handwriting analysis to assess personality
purchases and buying trends from credit cards to assess personality
facial features to assess personality
and other methods like them add distortion to the measurement.

ALL indirect methods, ADD a lot of DISTORTION to the measurement.
The best way to assess personality of daters is using a normative instrument.



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

Please remember:
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.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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 Online Dating Industry needs a very powerful algorithm like the "Teller Ulam design". In this case 100 times more powerful than actual matching algorithms.

Breaking "the online dating sound barrier" is to achieve at least:
3 most compatible persons in a 100,000 persons database.
12 most compatible persons in a 1,000,000 persons database.
48 most compatible persons in a 10,000,000 persons database.
100 times better than Compatibility Matching Algorithms used by actual online dating sites!

The only way to achieve that 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. The ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is nearly 7.0 * 10E9 (estimated OCT 2011)
- expressing compatibility with eight decimals, like The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 92.55033557%  +/- 0.00000001% similar to the pattern 7.7.6.8.8.7.6.5.8.7.4.5.7.7.3.4
Using a quantized pattern comparison method (part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation) to calculate similarity between prospective mates.

That is the only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry.

All other proposals are .............. NOISE and perform as placebo!

 

Dirty tricks from Chemistry

Just received some emails from Chemistry, a 7 years old & obsolete site, performing as placebo.



 They said:
Open This Email to Get Paid Subscriber Status!
Open This Email To Get Chemistry for FREE!
But they are only dirty tricks to make you click and then, the subscribe screen appears.

Friday, July 6, 2012

eHarmony USA patched the Questionnaire? 4





In previous posts I had written about patches at eHarmony's Questionnaire in Attitudes and Opinions.
It seems to be an adaptive questionnaire it appears when you nearly finish the last question of the "original & old" questionnaire.
---------------------------------------------------------


eHarmony's Team is very comfortable attracting, converting and retaining subscribers with automatic renewal of their subscriptions and other credit-card billing trickery. They really do not want to innovate.

UPDATE eHarmony passwords incident.









Cold Winter here in South America.

Just testing eHarmony (USA site) in these Free Communication long WeekEnd and discovered eHarmony does not allow (NOW) a password longer than 14 characters.

Latest hacking incident was highly publicized mainly because many users/clients used the combination EHARM or HARMONY or EHARMONY as part of their passwords.

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.

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

OkCupid research: RUBBISH



Please DO NOT trust research conducted by OkCupid.
It is all rubbish, severely biased.

Please see how the majority of OKCupid’s free users are big liars and cheaters, you cannot trust in what they say or do!!!

October 26th, 2009
46% of men and 30% of women say they are a genius, they think they are one in a thousand!

OkCupid is for fun dating, for entertainment purposes, for instant gratifications; not for serious dating.


Please remember:
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 for online dating purposes)
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.


WorldWide, there are over 5,000 online dating sites but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar test) to assess personality of its members.
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

Quantifying the Online-Dating Revolution ???

A recent article at  WSJ talked about Quantifying the Online-Dating Revolution.

Which revolution ???

Because 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%).

Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates, have less or at least the same precision as searching on one's own. [in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened]
* That is because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.


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.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 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 Tunguska event was an enormously powerful explosion that occurred in what is now Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia, at about 0:14 UT on June 30 1908. The explosion is believed to have been caused by the air burst of a large meteoroid or comet fragment at an altitude of 5–10 kilometres (3–6 mi) above the Earth's surface.
The energy of the blast was nearly 15 megatons of TNT roughly equal to the United States' Castle Bravo thermonuclear bomb tested on March 1, 1954; about 1,000 times more powerful than the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan (codenamed  Little Boy).

The idea of a thermonuclear fusion bomb ignited by a smaller fission bomb was first proposed by Enrico Fermi to his colleague Edward Teller in 1941 at the start of what would become the Manhattan Project.
Other prominent scientists openly recommended building nuclear bombs more powerful than the standard pure-fission model. Their assumption was that critical mass considerations would limit the potential size of fission explosions, but that a fusion explosion could be as large as its supply of fuel, which has no critical mass limit.
In January 1951, Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam invented radiation-powered ablation-drive implosion.
The Teller–Ulam design is the nuclear weapon design concept used in most of the world's multi-megaton-range thermonuclear weapons;  a 1,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima's Little Boy. In most applications the bulk of its destructive energy comes from uranium fission, not hydrogen/deuterium/tritium  fusion
Its essential features, which officially remained secret for nearly three decades, are:
1) separation of stages into a triggering "primary" explosive and a much more powerful "secondary" explosive
2) compression of the secondary by X-rays coming from nuclear fission in the primary, a process called the "radiation implosion" of the secondary,
3) heating of the secondary, after cold compression, by a second fission explosion inside the secondary.


The Online Dating Industry needs a very powerful algorithm like the "Teller Ulam design". In this case 100 times more powerful than actual matching algorithms.

Breaking "the online dating sound barrier" is to achieve at least:
3 most compatible persons in a 100,000 persons database.
12 most compatible persons in a 1,000,000 persons database.
48 most compatible persons in a 10,000,000 persons database.
100 times better than Compatibility Matching Algorithms used by actual online dating sites!

The only way to achieve that 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. The ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is nearly 7.0 * 10E9 (estimated OCT 2011)
- expressing compatibility with eight decimals, like The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 92.55033557%  +/- 0.00000001% similar to the pattern 7.7.6.8.8.7.6.5.8.7.4.5.7.7.3.4
Using a quantized pattern comparison method (part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation) to calculate similarity between prospective mates.

That is the only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry.

All other proposals are .............. NOISE


Monday, July 2, 2012

They do not want to innovate

This year I was the only person in the world who wrote about eHarmony Japan failure. OnlineDatingPost and OnlinePersonalsWatch had ignored that big new.

I was the one who suggested (in private emails) While Label Dating companies could be laundering money and soon they will be under fraud investigation by the FBI.

I was also the one who suggested (in private emails) an online dating company as the mafia behind big hacking incidents, as if they are related or have contacts with the "Russian hackers".

I had reviewed over 55 compatibility matching engines intended for serious dating since 2003, when I had discovered "the online dating sound barrier" problem.

Since some years ago I had been secretly assisting lawyers who sue online dating sites for fake/inactive profiles, sending them screenshots and other valuable information. I continue and incentivize them to sue online dating sites for fraud.

Since some years ago I had been secretly denouncing several online dating sites for fraud at several Consumers' Associations worldwide (USA, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Brazil and many other countries).

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%).

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.

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. They really do not want to innovate.
I had called eHarmony's Team and IAC Personals' Team (Match, Chemistry, OkCupid and others) as a group of fools who do not want to innovate in nothing.

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.

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 Engage, Be2,  and others and said "hey, you had wasted your money". And when a new investment is done I send them an email saying "stupid investor series, today: you"

Hackers: I am not involved with them but I suspect they read my blog.

I had understood -in 2003- first and better than anybody the "online dating sound barrier" phenomenon, but it took several years to me to understand that sometimes you can not launch anything new without destroying pre-existent proposals.

How I can make more noise in the Online Dating Industry?