A perfect application of the Forer effect: humans have an amazing ability to interpret what can apply to anyone as having special significance for themselves.<p>It's the same reason why horoscopes and fortune cookies work. Stepping back and thinking logically, it's easy to see why their messages might apply to a lot of people. But when you're reading one, you can't help but think, "Ah! It says that I would encounter adversity at work this week, but overcome it! I <i>knew</i> that presentation wasn't the end of the world." And if you're a little lonely or down and need emotional rapport, you can't help but feel a little spark of excitement and connection when that Mechanical Turker claims to like your favorite TV show - especially because the text messages from the fake partner look just like they would from a real one.<p>No matter how deeply we trust our logical conclusions, our emotional response remains the same. We can't help but feel worthier when we're being praised (even by computers - see the Silicon Sycophants study: <a href="http://pdf.aminer.org/000/307/350/information_requirements_are_human_computers_only_machines_measur_s_rigorous.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://pdf.aminer.org/000/307/350/information_requirements_a...</a>), hurt when we're being insulted, and connected when we're being connected with.
Funny to see this here. My business partner did the design and I'm friends with the team.<p>I can't say that I feel much for the business, but I've been continually impressed by its ability to generate press. People _love_ talking about and debating this concept, and I can't say that I've been completely free from it.<p>That being said, this is currently probably the most covered startup from Saint Louis. While it is nice to see a startup from this ecosystem getting this amount of press attention, it's disappointing at the same time. I know a lot of people working on very ambitious and difficult problems that would kill for a tenth of the amount of attention that Invisible Boyfriend and Invisible Girlfriend get.
Reading this all I can think of are the "ractors" in Stephenson's "The Diamond Age" (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age</a>).
Is this a "Black Mirror moment"?<p><a href="http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/31/7471901/i-cant-stop-comparing-everything-to-black-mirror" rel="nofollow">http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/31/7471901/i-cant-stop-compa...</a>
I think it's not as much about social proof as it is about feeling protected and cared for. The marketing strategy ("social proof" over "feeling lonely") let the users benefit from the service without feeling shame: loneliness is unfortunately still considered some kind of stigma.<p>Invisible Boyfriend might be the polar opposite and complement of prostitution: the first simulating the love between a protector and his protégé, the second providing a sex partner. I'm not implying any moral fault, but it's fascinating nonetheless.
People used to look at me weird when I explained how I was paranoid that someone was routing all of my conversations between multiple people, in an effort to cluster intelligence and intellectual contributions without any participant knowing what they were contributing to.<p>Take that, therapy. Yes, the paranoia was somewhat imaginative, but it was an exaggeration of something that actually can be mechanized. The people I explained this to didn't believe me that you could create chat streams this way.
Not surprised that it works, it looks like something fun to do on both sides. In fact, i believe people who love romance would sign up for a free service like this on both ends. (Since their niche is people who dont want to have the actual relationships, they could easily pair up their users with each other as pure conversation partners).<p>The sad thing is the reason that this app exists. Has it become so taboo to be single that you have to pay to hide it?
This article was great. I especially liked:<p><pre><code> “Oh my God,” I thought. “This total stranger, whoever he or she is, thinks I cry myself to sleep while watching public television and texting a paid fake boyfriend I named after an actor.”
</code></pre>
To all you folks saying this is really sad, or wrong, this is a novelty. It's like the digital equivalent of a gag gift. It's a great conversation starter and really very funny.
Reminds me of the autistic kid whose only friend is Siri<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-j-cameron-phd-bcbad/an-individual-with-autism_b_5534741.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-j-cameron-phd-bcbad/an...</a>
Virtual girlfriends have been popular in Japan for years. Love Plus (2009) for the Nintendo DS was the first to catch on. There are now many others. Some text and send you pictures of what they're doing. You can send your virtual girlfriend presents on-line, which costs real money.<p>Now in beta, an Oculus Rift virtual girlfriend.
Reminded me of "The Entire History of You" from Black Mirror[1] tv series (I really don't feel like calling it that way, it's more like a separate movies). I highly recommend it.<p>I wonder how long it takes before those lower(st) paid jobs for those that are not specialized in anything will be in something like mechanical turk. Especially in this example it's visible that those can sometimes require somewhat local workers, so they may spread outside countries with lowest cost of living.
I don't understand how their business model could scale, i.e. how they would be profitable, if indeed, they have real person(s) responding to multiple women (or users who've designated themselves as a woman :).<p>Let say 1 "real human" is responding to 10 women at the same time, the membership income from these 10 users (not accounting for software, hardware overheads even) = $25 / month X 10 paid users = $250.<p>If this "real human" is located in US, even taking a minimum wage of $10 / hour and assuming he/she works 160 hours a month ( 8 hours per day x 5 days a week x 4 weeks a month), the cost of having this "real person" on the payroll = $1,600 per month!<p>$250 - $1,600 = - $1,350. i.e. they would be losing over 1K per every few users if this is how they are doing it.<p>Unless, of course, the "real human person(s)" responding to multiple women are located in India / China and work for $1 a day or something like that.<p>Or maybe they are using Machine Learning or some sort of Artificial Intelligence, to come up with "Cute" Texts and responses based on the User's selected preferences and his/her past Texts to this "Invisible Boyfriend".<p>Only in the last case does it makes sense. But then, they'd be guilty of "false advertizing" if they claim that a "real human person" is at the other end responding...
This makes for an interesting thought experiment, particularly when you compare and contrast it with the concept of the "waifu" (loosely, an animated character from Anime or videogames people associate as being their significant other).<p>One is a coping mechanism for handing external pressures, the other internal. I wonder how healthy either can be in the long run.
This article remembered me again that Psychology is something really interesting. No matter how strange all of this can appear to us looking from an outside view, this is how our brain works. If you know how psychology works you are able to create new business around of it. After reading it I wonder about how much, strange or not, psychology demands people have.
Basically virtual escorting as a service (not all escorting is sex, some of it is just companionship). For now there's no sex involved but with how easy it is to connect people nearby you could easily see this type of service expand in markets where it's legal.<p>I could see nude selfies being sent too down the road (again a different service, not exactly this one).
<i>The thing that has been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.</i> ~ Ecclesiastes 1:9<p>George Glass: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2egRZia504" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2egRZia504</a>
OH YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I built something like this a long long time ago as a quirky project for my CS class at Columbia. When I pitched the idea to my buddies, they thought it was stupid and that my prof would have given me a shitty grade. So I scrapped it and submitted another project instead. I had 3 bots hooked up to the Facebook API on April 1st and it was so believable that my girlfriend thought I was cheating on her. One time she said "who the hell is this Rachel??" and would not let me leave the room until I told her who she was. I eventually confessed and she thought it was a hilarious idea. Too bad I got too busy with other shit that I put the project away on the side burner. Now I'm thinking about pulling it out again..........
There is a similar appeal to conversing with a self-learning chatbot (thinkingai.com, etc). Not as consistent at times, but similarly intriguing how "easy" it is to trick you into believing you had a "real" relationship.
Invisible Girlfriend Monthly Subscription: $24.99/month<p>100 texts
10 voicemails
1 postcard<p>...<p>I think 100 texts is a bit low for $24.99/month. The postcard option is very nice, so are the voice mails however.<p>But how do the voice mails work? Will it be the same voice every time?
> the service has also seen a surge in interest from people in conservative countries, particularly in South America and Europe, where the stigmas against being single or LGBT remain pretty strong.<p>Uhm this is odd, I don't know about South America but Europe? Here in Sweden LGBT people are even allowed to marry in church before their god <a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2009/10/22/Church-of-Sweden-to-conduct-gay-weddings/UPI-59671256256299/" rel="nofollow">http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2009/10/22/Church-...</a>
"The man on the other end isn’t imaginary. He’s a real human person"<p>And a real hero?
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DSVDcw6iW8" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DSVDcw6iW8</a>
Ryan, or Susan? I like that Ryan is a composite of many Turkers, but don't see why he should be played only by men. In fact I bet women would be better overall at text-flirting with other women.
This really reminds of the 30 Rock episode about porn for women: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGcRz9jJJCU" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGcRz9jJJCU</a><p>Edit: before anyone questions it, I am not saying that in any derogatory manner. Just a similar concept in a way, though obviously this has very different value proposition.
>>“That rapport you feel with Ryan may actually be six or seven Ryans,” Homann explains.<p>Or Rhondas. Women know what women want from a fake boyfriend service. What subterfuge is needed to fool the parents, what parents expect, etc. The text exchange about Downton Abbey makes me suspect that their staff are, at least partly, female.
It's inspiring but I have a question: People always think they can describe what they need (a perfect boyfriend?) But in fact not. "Perfect" things get boring very quickly, especially when you know it's designed.
I found it so wrong...<p>Sentiments are real, I don't think anybody should play with other person feeling...<p>Of course the user signed up, and they think that this is what they want, but I honestly believe that nobody want to risk to fail in love for a nobody...
I wonder why they have the silly 2 + 3 = ? thing in their form at the bottom of the homepage.<p>It's text/html, so it can't be anti-bot and seems like pointless for a human... Does anyone else know the logic behind that?
For $25/month, I wonder how the economics of this work out.<p>Say they pay $0.05/text (to the MTurker). In about 500 texts, the budget will be used up. That's about 15 texts/day; that's not a lot for today.
I try to explain this the first time I took a Myers-Briggs.<p>"You're an INTG. Get together with other INTGs, read the descriptions... See, isn't this you?"
all I see is a fear (of being alone, whatever might be the reason) and weakness (to face reality, to stand to annoying people around etc.).
You wanna be alone? So be, and be proud of it, no small lies all around you. Or way more realistically, you wanna partner? Well get the hell out of your stupid phone and meet real people. It ain't easy, but nothing really important in life is...
I find it sad that she needs an invisible boyfriend ... her friends and family shouldn't be pressuring her and if she's got someone harassing her, will showing him a text really stop it?<p>Both these scenarios assume she's happy without a BF but the fact that she describes feeling that she might have fallen in love could also mean she actually wants a boyfriend but can't find one. Things are tougher on women these days (<a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2011/02/sex_is_cheap.2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2011/02/sex_i...</a>).