We learned that âbeing niceâ is a technical decision, not a personality trait
While building our AI matchmaker at LoveActually.ai, we ran into an unexpected engineering lesson. âNicenessâ in AI isnât free. Itâs a tuning choice. Most models default to minimizing user discomfort. In dating, that often means preserving feelings while repeating the same failure patterns. We experimented with shifting the system slightly: less emotional smoothing, more pattern reflection....
From a systems perspective: should AI coaches optimize for comfort or correction?
Hey PH đ Weâre building LoveActually.ai, an AI matchmaker launching soon. I wanted to share a technical dilemma we ran into and hear how other builders think about it. Most conversational AI systems are tuned to be supportive and agreeable. From an engineering standpoint, thatâs a reasonable default â it minimizes risk. But in our dating use case, that tuning caused a failure mode: the system...
The hardest part of building an AI matchmaker wasnât the model
The hardest part of building an AI matchmaker wasnât the model. It was deciding what not to optimize. From an engineering perspective, itâs very easy to make a dating product look âaliveâ: more swipes, more matches, more notifications. The harder problem was building systems that could: â tolerate silence â slow down recommendations â and still be confident in a match We spent a surprising...
We built an AI matchmaker that optimizes for relationships, not swipes
Hey PH đ Iâm the CTO at LoveActually. Iâve spent most of my career building recommendation systems, and dating apps have always bothered me from an engineering standpoint. Most of them are optimized for engagement: swipe more, match more, keep you coming back. But very few are built to help two people actually build something that lasts. That frustration is why we built LoveActually. What we...
