Game theory dating
Imagine, an online dating service that only the super attractive can join? Although good looking is subjective, it is also quite objective compare to other factors.
There are easy ways to use a software algorithm to identify what features are considered good looking plus information on weight and height.
At a bar or party, you have certain disadvantages, like you know nothing about the person other than what they look like and what they like to drink, you can’t talk to each other because it’s too noisy, and you’re under pressure to make a good impression fast or else the person’s attention might stray elsewhere.
Without hooking up, your only real alternative is to navigate the hideous and awkward realm of the first date, the first kiss, the first acknowledgment to the person that you “like them like them,” and all the other painfully vulnerable moments that accompany pre-sexual romantic behavior.
I think the problem boils down to this: if you want a “relationship” (as opposed to a random hook-up), the relationship has to start. (That that situation EVER results in a relationship is a testimony to the persistence of humans in pursuing a partnership.) But it seems a lot of college students would rather face all these obstacles than sit sober and face to face with a relative stranger over dinner.
Or someone has to come up with an alternative to either dating or hooking up.
We apply the notion of Nash Equilibrium, first, to some more coordination games; in particular, the Battle of the Sexes.
What advice an economist can provide for online dating service by applying game theories?
Watching these love birds on the beach, I started to think about game theory and love.