Deano’s answer to: “What is the biggest dating site in America?”

The industry as a whole is very "numbers phobic", in large part due to the potential issues they'd have in accurately marketing the small number of local matches typically exist among the active membership.

Case in point: pre-acquisition (by just a few days, really), OKCupid put out this scathing article about how useless it is to pay for a dating site, and drills down heavily into the numbers:

http://static.izs.me/why-you-sho…

Why does my link not actually go to OKCupid? Well, Match.com bought them, and <poof>, the article disappeared!

Hrm!

Anyway, Long story short, I'd say your friend is right in terms of "active traffic" being in favor of Craigslist… After all, only 5% or less of match.com and eHarmony's respective members are likely active! That said, there's no way to tell how many of the posts on craigslist are real to begin with (the tales of scam/spam/cam ads are never-ending), as well as no way to judge things like number of CL marriages, etc. Oh yeah, and Craig also sells used dishwashers and rents apartments, among many many other things, so there's also no good way to separate out the dating traffic.

Perhaps it's easier to say that, assuming all active dating traffic on all dating sites was real, including craigslist, that the latter site would be far ahead of any of the pay sites in terms of worldwide ad postings.

Still, I've blatantly ignored the other majors, like free site plentyoffish.com, which is reputed to have a pretty large active membership, as well as sites like Zoosk and Tagged with fairly high "buzz" factor (well, at least, last year).

With no one releasing solid verifiable figures on their performance, it's just not really possible to say whether you or your friend are correct. Rather, it's best to say that there really are no actual "dating" sites – all the sites mentioned are simply compatibility matching engines, none of whom track or report statistics on actual dates that happen in the real world. Kinda sad, huh?

What is the biggest dating site in America?

Deano’s answer to: “Why is it Amazon can sell its hard-copy books and deliver to everywhere in the world but not its ebooks?”

Print publishing, like film distribution or the music recording industry, has historically been licensed by territory – sometimes an individual country, but just as often for an entire region (say, South America), even if the region itself represents multiple written/spoken languages.

The Internet operates almost entirely non-territorially in terms of content distribution: this is the first, foremost, and most highly valued quality of the Internet[*].

Unfortunately, this has meant that for the entire history of the Internet, it has operated at cross-purposes with much of the commercial content distribution channels of the world. And it has only been very slowly, as they are dragged kicking and screaming epithets that would make a sailor blush, that these industries have come to the realization that the Internet isn't going away, and cannot be fully controlled.

To address the issue of eBooks specifically, it basically boils down to simple contract negotiation:

Most contracts for the vast majority of books in existence were signed before eBooks had any significant market presence, and as such rights for eBook distribution are largely governed on the publisher's – rather than the author's – preferred terms. Is this sounding a lot like the music industry again? There's a reason for that.

On the other hand, unlike music, which most people are happy to replay over and over, and perhaps even pay for a live event, books are typically read once or twice – and while some authors can command for-pay speaking engagements and appearances, most of the time they are "happy" to tour the country to do readings and signings for free[†] in the hopes that it helps sell another 10-20 copies per city.

So, really, it's a different business in which most authors working with a publisher never receive more than their initial advance against royalties, are generally happier the more involved the publisher is, and are also happy when the publishers place restrictions "in an effort to curb piracy/increase licensing revenues" using the outdated per-region model, since they don't really have another way to bring in cash – besides writing another book. Which is why so few authors don't also have a day/side job per capita compared to 'published' musicians/film directors/television actors/etc.

Anyway, all this boils down to the following: eBooks are a new phenomenon working within an old framework. As new contracts are written, things are (glacially) changing in favor of innovations like "per language" licensing terms for digital content – which is ultimately a benefit to readers in countries that may never get a native, say, Swedish edition of a book that is released in German/English/etc), the source publisher/author (fewer third parties to deal with/sign off on), and even the licensees of really obscure languages – who can now be the "sole world source of the Tamil edition", rather than having to battle it out with… Okay, nevermind. But for really any multi-country language that supports a large enough readership, it's a huge win and can't get here fast enough.

Amazon gets this, and they are totally on our side – much like the various states/localities that are implementing affiliate taxation, it makes things so much more complicated for Amazon that it's easier to pull out than adhere to rules made to prop up pre-Internet economies. They would be overjoyed to offer English language eBooks the world over, just like Apple would kill to be able to sell the J-Pop catalog available to iTunes customers in Japan to all the anime-obsessed otaku back here in the US.

Long story short: it'll happen. But, based on the current pacing, it's easily still a 20 year mission to get it to happen, barring more significant economic disruption (or even environmental concerns over dead-tree book production/distribution) than we have seen to date. Much like digital music, movies, and television, though, I think we'll need to see a greater uptick in either direct consumer demand for such licensing changes (led, or agreed to, by a robust conclave of notable authors), or eBook piracy[ª] that cuts deeply into legal publishers' revenues.

[* Not really, it's actually porn, of course. ]

[† Usually paid for at least in part by the publisher, and again stuffed somewhere in the contract under "author obligations". ]

[ª Due to the overall lower consumption of books compared to other media today, piracy still hasn't really flourished to the same extent – I can, at the snap of my fingers, download a torrent of the soundtrack to "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas" in minutes, but even finding a listing for a tenth of the bestselling books available for Kindle/iBooks/Kobo/etc is a challenge well beyond me. ]

Why is it Amazon can sell its hard-copy books and deliver to everywhere in the world but not its ebooks?

Deano’s answer to: “What is it like as a male working in a female dominated industry?”

Off the top of my head, the following emotions are strongest:

  • A generalized "a-ha" twinge of how things must so often be for women in traditionally male-dominated roles,
  • A more personally-focused "but… ow" nausea emanating from the general unfairness of the gender-sourced imbalance, and
  • An almost forlorn "dammit" gut-punch that arises from the disparity not only of support or stature within a given industry, but also the ongoing basic differences between male and female behavior that make it so – and as a result make it unlikely that even a world filled solely with equality-minded men and women would significantly change the picture.

There are a whole host of other, more subtle, perhaps even more dangerous undercurrents… But essentially, it's those three that keep rising to the top.

Talking to other men in similar situations, I could also add that such work often carries with it similar burdens for men as male dominated industries do for women:

  • Lower pay
  • At times hostile reactions from other men who don't understand why another man would do such a job when other "manlier" work exists,
  • Similarly hostile reactions from some women, who don't like the idea of men "horning in" on one of the comparatively few fields where women are higher-paid, more appreciated, etc.

Even where money isn't really involved (among the other jobs that qualify for this question, I've had a longish, and mostly-unintentional stint as a stay-at-home dad for a couple years now), general societal attitudes of what's okay for men and women is still well behind the "enlightenment curve", shall we say.

The worst bit is probably all the folks who truly seem to want to be more open-minded about it, but clearly still fall back on very different inherited teachings in terms of how they treat/interact with such a man. This last bit is almost identical to how single people treat the newly married – not exactly shunning them per se, but just assuming they're no longer interested in certain activities or events.

What is it like as a male working in a female dominated industry?

Deano’s answer to: “How do you improve your small talk?”

Invitations.

Invite people to talk about themselves by providing them a safe forum to do so – be neither disinterested clockwatcher, nor obsessed interrogator.

Focus on “how can I be of service to this lovely human being“, and then radiate that. If you aren’t good at radiating, try thinking it, and then slowly exhaling the thought out your nose(*).

Other good invitations to use:

  • Invite them to share their opinion on a subject dear to you (or them)
  • Invite their assistance in some fairly trivial manner, like a parlor trick, or making sure you don’t have toilet paper stuck anywhere you can’t see.
  • Invite them to contact you in the future, because you’ve had such a lovely chat – willingness to exchange contact info raises the bar on how highly you esteem them, which is often understood and reciprocated at some level.
  • If things don’t go well, invite them to speak with a friend of yours, who was “just talking about” some topic of interest to your ‘dud’ conversation partner.

Overall, just try to remember this: small talk is about engaging without offense… Hold back too much, and you won’t ever engage.

(*Totally unscientific fact: Doing so releases subcommunicative pheremones that help convey your thoughts and wishes. Slow steady breathing also helps keep you calm and settled, which makes others feel more at ease. But, seriously, it’s the pheremones. I promise.)

This answer originally appeared on Quora: How do you improve your small talk?

Deano’s answer to: “For those who went to top-tier schools, is it more rude to answer directly when asked what school you attended, or to instead name the city where the school is located? Why?”

This isn’t a top-tier problem. It’s an Ivy problem. It’s not even on the same level – and that’s not meant as arrogance about the quality of education, community, etc.

Ivy League schools are an INSTANT SHORTHAND FOR ELITISM. Hollywood just doesn’t make movies where the slimy rich bastard you’re supposed to hate went to UC Berkeley. People in Iowa just wouldn’t get the joke.

Good Will Hunting wouldn’t work if you swapped out MIT with Stanford, because once you leave the Stanford campus, you’re not deciding between the crackhouse gangsterism of Cambridgeport or the green-beer-fueled Leprechaunarchy of Boston… You’re deciding between getting run over by pre-owned Beemers on University Ave, or brand new Teslas on Sand Hill Road.

Random guy on the street in Jakarta knows Harvard and Yale. Doesn’t know Vanderbilt, UW Madison, Wharton, etc. Just the facts.

Simply put, if you’re not talking about an Ivy, there’s nothing wrong with naming the school, ever. Put those fears to rest.

But, if you are cursed with “old brick” on the resumé, then it does occasionally pay to think twice, and check the guy who’s asking to see if he’s waving a sock full of pennies – or even just a homely Midwestern misconception of how much you must be like Tom Hanks in Volunteers – before answering anything other than “a little town in Connecticut that used to the world capital of ball point pens before the Internet happened.”

This answer originally appeared on Quora: For those who went to top-tier schools, is it more rude to answer directly when asked what school you attended, or to instead name the city where the school is located? Why?