They're already making inescapable panopticon AI to track your every move.
What if we took that same concept and instructed the thing to put romantically-compatible people in contact with each other?
If the robot could find me a gf with 90% certainty, I would willingly give it access to all my personal information to sell to advertisers.

>>16710871 (OP)
>If the robot could find me a gf with 90% certainty, I would willingly give it access to all my personal information to sell to advertisers.
that's not enough. we're talking about your one and true SOULMATE here, anon.
you're gonna have to cough up some money first. a few grand should be enough.

jokes aside, this is a common scam, and you can see it playing out every time a new advancement in information processing is made.
there has to be a seinfeld episode of someone falling for something like that or something.
it's not new, and none of the new fangled technologies back in the day turned out to be as magical as their corporate shills made them out to be.
ai isn't magic either. it can regurgitate what it was fed, but nothing more.

ai is about recognizing patterns.
what data would you even feed it?
"happy couple" yes or no, but beyond that?
do you have a database about people who eat in bed? about who holds in a fart within the presence of a loved one? about willingness to do the dishes after working all week?
would you be willing to answer all of those questions and maybe 5000 more in a questionnaire?
no?

then your computer probably won't be able to know those things for another decade or three, until everyone willingly puts cameras inside their toilet bowls or something.

thats - not how love works

>>16711101
Analyze social media feeds/general online activity, identifying couples in stable relationships, then work backward looking at the information on both parties to build out your parameters. I don't even know what OP's "90% certainty" would mean but I bet it could do a better job than people mindlessly swiping on apps.
>ai is about recognizing patterns.
Yeah it's pretty good for taking incomplete info and getting to a mostly right answer a lot of the time.

>>16710871 (OP)
>i would happily join the inescapable panopticon if it would get me laid
OP, we have very bad news for you.

>>16711175
but what if they didn't post any of the important stuff to social media?
you can't recognize a pattern in data you cannot access, and i'm arguing that most of what would bother you in a partner, or what you would love is not something they would choose to post on the internet, and that it might be stuff that nobody cares to write down at all.

if you try, you will find lots of things about yourself, that nobody would ever be able to learn from shit you post on the internet.
you have a unique smell, matter of speaking, unique gestures and facial expressions, and whatever weird little habits you might have, just to name a few things.

how is the computer going to infer the way she looks at you, just from the twitter she made to talk shit about her boss?
how much of that slight lisp that annoys other people, but sounds really cute to you can be inferred from that speech therapist visit from her google calendar 15 years ago?
where is the computer going to get pictures of her perfectly symmetrical toes, that always get your dick hard as diamonds, if she never had an onlyfans?

the answer is, that it cannot, and the ai that will confidently answer those questions for you is as blind to those things as you or I are.
don't fall for AI dating sites.
don't be a rube.

>>16711193
>how is the computer going to infer the way she looks at you, just from the twitter she made to talk shit about her boss?
An early 2000s support vector machine would classify you neatly as a female/catamite from this faggot-ass sentence alone. Sckeptickism is healthy, cope is cringe. Faggot.

>>16711184
WE KNOW WE'RE ALREADY IN IT WE JUST WANT IT TO GIVE US A WIFE

>>16713192
>wum ima waifu?!?
Meet your new cellmate. Bubba's been alone for a long, long time, Junior.
Have fun.

>>16710871 (OP)
OKcupid had like 2,000 personality questions you could do. I did all of them, matched with a bunch of hella autistic women 95%+ who were all borderline non-verbal, then quit the platform.