经济学人下载:优化浪漫 恋爱中的经济学(下)

The best matching markets are those that are “thick”, with lots of participants.
最好的配对市场是“厚”市场，即有着大量参与者的市场。

The more people there are seeking digital dates, the greater the chance of finding a good match.
寻求数字配对的人越多，找到一个好伴侣的机会就越大。

Odds improve that another person in the crowd also enjoys Wagner, Thai food, or discussions about the economics of matching markets.
这种概率会在人海中的另一个人也喜欢瓦格纳、泰国食物或是关于配对市场的经济学讨论时大幅提升。 

The wealth of information many dating sites request may help to home in on the perfect match, but if the effort involved is enough to deter potential mates from joining in the first place, then it does more harm than good.
许多约会网站所要求的信息财富可能有助于促成完美的配对。但是倘若涉及的尝试多到足以从一开始就把潜在的约会对象吓跑的话，这种设计就是弊大于利了。

When Tinder first launched, largely to facilitate casual sex, users assessed one another based only on looks, age and gender.
Tinder最初上线时主要是为了方便随意的性行为，用户之间的评估只是基于外貌、年龄和性别。

Simplicity worked wonders; there are 26m matches made between Tinder users each day.
简单带来了奇迹；Tinder用户每天达成的配对有2600万之多。

The advantages of thick markets are lost, however, if they become too “congested”, with users overwhelmed by the number of participants and unable to locate a good match among them.
然而，如果变得过于“拥挤”，厚市场的优势就会消失，用户会被参与者的数量吓跑，并且无法在参与者当中定位到一个好的伙伴。

One response is to specialise.
一种应对之策就是专业化。

JSwipe, for instance, caters to Jewish singles while Bumble, an app where women must initiate contact, is meant to attract feminists.
例如，JSwipe就是专门为单身犹太人量身定制的，而女性必须主动发起联系的Bumble则是一个意在吸引女权人士的app。

But the most popular apps seek to help their users filter possible mates using clever technology.
但是，大多数受欢迎的app都在设法运用聪明的技术帮助用户去筛选潜在的伙伴。

Tinder, for example, only provides users with profiles of fellow Tinderites who are nearby, to make it that much easier to meet in person.
例如，Tinder只提供给用户邻近用户的简历，以便让见面变得更容易。

It has also introduced a “super like” feature, which can be deployed only once a day, to allow smitten users to signal heightened interest in someone.
它还引入了一个一天只能使用一次的“真爱”选项，以允许被倾倒的用户表达对某人的高度兴趣。

In addition, last year it started allowing people to list their jobs and education, to help users to sort through the crowds.
除此之外，它还从去年开始允许人们贴出自己的工作和学历，以帮助用户在茫茫人海中搜寻。

Users get the benefits both of a big pool of potential partners and various tools to winnow them.
用户的收获是一大群潜在的伴侣和各种各样把他们筛选出来的工具的双重好处。

The emergence of matching apps, for those seeking love or theatre tickets or a lift, has certainly made once-onerous tasks more convenient.
针对寻找真爱、搜寻门票或者是设法拼车之人的配对app的出现，的确让曾经耗时费力的任务变得方便了。

They may also contribute to more profound economic change.
它们或许还会促成更为深远的经济变革。

Dating apps could strengthen the trend toward “assortative mating”, whereby people choose to couple with those of similar income and skills.
婚配app可能强化了婚姻向“选择性婚配”发展的趋势，让人们借以选择与有着相同收入和技能的人结婚成家。

By one estimate, the trend accounts for about 18% of the rise in income inequality in America between 1960 and 2005.
据估算，这种趋势在美国的收入不平等于1960年至2005年间的上升中的占比约为18%。

A recent study of online dating in South Korea found that it boosted sorting among couples by education.
对南韩网上约会的一项最新研究发现，它刺激了根据学历寻找另一半的行为。

Better matching may also mean bigger cities.
更好的配对也许还意味着更大的城市。

Metropolitan goliaths have long been melting-pots, within which those early on in their adult lives link up with jobs, friends and mates.
长期以来，大都市就是一个大熔炉，生活在其中的刚踏入成年人生活的人都是通过工作、朋友和伴侣联系在一起的。

Matching apps, romantic or not, make it easier to navigate the urban sprawl and sample all it has to offer.
配对app，不管浪漫与否都能让人们更容易地穿行于城市的各个角落之间，并且能更容易地从其必然会提供的各种机会中找到自己想要的。

That, in turn, should make the biggest cities relatively more attractive to young people.
这相应地也应当让大城市变得对年轻人更具吸引力。

Apps cannot yet make break-ups less painful.
然而，app不可能减少分手的痛苦。

And love remains mysterious enough that even the most refined algorithms cannot predict mutual attraction with confidence.
而且爱情的神秘依旧足以让纵然是经过千百次修改的算法也不可能以信心十足地预测相互之间的吸引。

But they clearly help, judging by their legions of users.
但是，从这些用户大军来判断，它们肯定是起作用的。

After all, it is better to have super-liked and lost than never to have super-liked at all.
毕竟，有真爱并且迷失于真爱，怎么说都好于压根没有真爱。