So... am I missing something, or is the only evidence they cite a thin correlation between increased online dating and increasing rates of interracial marriage?
Yeah I was baffled by this article. It feels like it was more a simulation than science (observation, measurement, etc.)?
But if the researchers add random links between people from different ethnic groups, the level of interracial marriage changes dramatically. “Our model predicts nearly complete racial integration upon the emergence of online dating, even if the number of partners that individuals meet from newly formed ties is small,” say Ortega and Hergovich.
The original paper is probably better, but this explains almost nothing to me.
Simulations can certainly be a way of doing science. Of course you have to ask how realistic the simulation is, but that's true of any model -- you always have to be aware of your simplifying assumptions.
I found this article to be a good way to hone my bullshit detector. It’s a reputable source, I’m sure many people would read it and pass the conclusions on to friends without thinking too deeply. Part of the appeal of HN to me is that I can read something, form an opinion, and get immediate feedback as to what others think. I would miss that if I read the comments first.
It looks like the article commits classical "post hoc ergo propter hoc" error - if interracial marriage became more common at the same time as online dating became more common, it must be that the latter caused the former. Obviously, it could also be that people became more accepting of interracial marriages because of reasons having nothing to do with online dating - but the article does not admit such possibilities.
Yep. Also, online dating lets users filter potential partners to a much greater extent than they realistically can irl. Seem like this might actually narrow the socioeconomic spectrum that they date within...
Being kind of curious, I fired up Safari's "private window", and it worked fine. I don't have FF on this box, but I do repro with Chrome. The detection is in article.js, and a quick glance indicates they're checking if the cookies get disabled. It would seem that Safari does that differently than FF or Chrome, and pass the test.
You're right, I checked the differences between ff and ff incognito on panopticlick.com and both have cookies enabled. I think it's the blocking of trackers/invisible trackers that the website is picking up on.
