Whether you love or loathe generative AI chatbots, they’re becoming increasingly involved in the business of romance.
There’s understandable skepticism about the technology’s place in dating. Still, a growing number of people are turning to AI as a de facto dating coach or relationship expert. Some use the technology to get guidance on creating a dating app profile, decode messages from potential partners and draft replies or seek general dating advice.
But those inquiries can have varying degrees of success. Understanding how to best harness a chatbot’s power and acknowledging its limitations can help.
Illustration: Peter Hamlin, AP
Here are some tips from experts.
WINGMAN, NOT GHOSTWRITER
Logan Ury, the director of relationship science at the dating app Hinge, said she understands people’s hesitance about AI but however we search for love, “what we’re searching for stays the same.” Hinge has AI-powered conversation starters and feedback tools to help build users’ profiles and make interactions smooth.
Ury said AI should be like your wingman rather than your ghostwriter because “when you show up on that date, it’s very important that who your match meets is the person who they’ve been talking to online.”
Getting feedback on a dating app profile and asking for first date ideas based on the interests of your match are good uses of the technology in Ury’s opinion. She does not advise copying and pasting messages written by a chatbot or using generative AI to alter or create images of yourself.
Some believe AI should have an even more limited role, like dating coach Erika Ettin. Tasks like proofreading your dating profile or messages are as far as she advises going with a chatbot. Ettin urges those looking for love to strive for authenticity, not perfection.
“All I ask is for people to put their own thought and critical thinking in first, and then if they’re going to use AI to check something, it’s after they have already formulated an opinion,” Ettin said.
ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
Many users are providing chatbots with “way too little and then expecting it to read their minds,” said Jules White, the director of Vanderbilt University’s initiative on the future of learning and generative AI.
The quality of the advice can vary significantly based on how you prompt the chatbot. Vague questions will likely yield a generic response. Specificity and question structure can get you a much more tailored result. But prompting isn’t about wordsmithing, contrary to some definitions, White said. It’s about learning how to “yield this computational thought effectively to solve problems.”
One technique White suggests is instructing your chatbot to ask questions of you. Users can input a prompt like, “Here’s what I’m trying to do. I want you to ask me questions one at a time until you have enough information to do that thing,” White said.
This way, the chatbot can adapt and change its next question based on users’ responses.
Prompts that help you think deeply about the situation are best, said Matt Shumer, a general partner at investment firm Shumer Capital and a prominent voice in the AI industry. Shumer advises people to tell their chatbots not to give them the answer, but “help me get there on my own.” In dating, an example would be presenting the chatbot with messages from a potential match you’re struggling to interpret and asking it to help you think about the situation like a dating coach would.
“Help me understand the nuance, how they might be thinking about it, what the right way to respond is, but don’t give me the answer,” Shumer said of how users could best communicate with a bot.
UNDERSTAND YOUR BIASES
Although many turn to AI because they think it will yield an objective response, the advice a chatbot can give you will only ever be as good as the information you feed it. And many chatbots are aiming to please you, so they’re more likely to tell you you’re right if you’re seeking advice about an argument or another complex situation.
If you only present your own perspective when asking for help with how to handle a fight with a partner, the chatbot likely wouldn’t be able to offer an objective take.
Liesel Sharabi, director of the Relationships and Technology Lab at Arizona State University, said providing a chatbot with as much information as you can from both sides of a situation — yours and your partner’s — can help, but it isn’t a cure all for combating the sycophantic nature of the bot.
“Hopefully, if you were having a problem in your relationship you wouldn’t make all of your decisions based on what one friend told you, right? Don’t do that with AI either — use it as one data point among many,” she said.
The comical bit of parachute journalism by Simon Shuster in the Atlantic last week under the title “Will Taiwan Just Give Up?”, drew much attention for its numerous minor errors, largely forgivable, its total lack of understanding of Taiwan and its history and its strange, pro-China interpretations, including taking Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) seriously. The laughter and indignation that essay generated among Taiwan aficionados is an indicator of how far Western journalism on Taiwan has come. Twenty years ago, it would have been another piece for the pile. Today, it is an obvious outlier. Shuster’s piece was
For a small nation, Taiwan has an unusually long list of territorial disputes. In part or in whole, it has disputes over the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) with Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. It also has another territorial dispute with Vietnam over the Paracel Islands, and with Japan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai Islands, 釣魚台). Of course, the biggest territorial disputes are with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which not only claims all of the above, but also Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙島), Kinmen, Penghu and all of Taiwan itself. This creates considerable headaches politically for the government, especially
The one-day trip begins at the geographical center of Taiwan: Puli Township’s (埔里) Hutou Mountain Geographic Center of Taiwan Monument (臺灣地理中心碑), embedded at the foot of Nantou County’s dense forested slopes. It sits entrenched in forest vegetation amid the tall, spindly bodies and spiky heads of the betel nut trees; the air is cool, and its surroundings are mostly silent save the sounds of late-season cicadas. Roughly two minutes from the first destination, and after a bend in Yongfeng Road (永豐路), there’s a glimpse of a resplendent golden dome on the horizon. It’s the cap of the 135m-tall main building of the
Two years ago, the music came to an abrupt halt at one of Taiwan’s largest independent music festivals. The problem: a single noise complaint. The DJ’s high-energy tunes had exceeded the allowed sound limit. As per regulation, the performance took a several-minute pause and then continued, this time at a slightly lower decibel. And then last year, the same event, Compass Taichung International Food and Music Festival, was unexpectedly canceled due to sponsorship issues. Such are the woes of trying to organize outdoor music festivals these days. “It makes it so much harder to put on a festival,” said Courtney Donovan Smith, co-publisher
RSS