Not about importance. However, it is filtered contact - very different from unfiltered human interaction. You can, for example, always disengage on internet - in real live that isn't always an option (no-one stays physically in your space, for example, or throws up on your shoes).

Internet vs physical is a different skill-set - the messiness level on latter is just much higher.

Not the parent, but it could mean that for some reason (biological, environmental or otherwise) some people don't receive as much pleasure from social contact as others. It could run the scale from mere introversion to pathological. To my knowledge there isn't a pill you can take that makes you more interested in a particular topic. (Although, when I think about it, anhedonia could be a symptom of depression so it could be addressed with medication. But some people don't have motivation to pursue treatment.)

Also, if one's social skills are lacking it's even harder to get treatment, if it's difficult to articulate the problem or why a stranger should care about them. One's social standards for failure could be set so high as a result of their past that only an AI or other parasocial method could be designed to clear them.

Sorry for the late response. What I mean by "progressive" here is that ability to divert resource from have to have-not, like progressive tax taking much bigger percentage from rich folks to fund program that benefits much poorer folks.

I think there's a claim that in online dating, top x% (x is a small number) got the majority of the match.

Assuming that there's a huge inherent inequality in charisma, likeability, social skills, etc. You cant really distribute them to those who need.