Did AI matchmakers put an end to our single eras?
Spoiler alert: No. But we gave them a shot.
We tried four AI matchmaking apps to see if any would deliver the loves of our lives. We spent weeks messaging with chatbot matchmakers, voting yay or nay on selected profiles, and even going on some dates.
The pools varied in size, from giants like Facebook Dating (with its 21 million users) to smaller startups like Sitch, Amata, and Three Day Rule. Sitch and Amata both have raised millions of dollars to build a new style of dating app where, instead of swiping through profiles, you get paired with an AI matchmaker — a chatbot — who brings you new matches.
This is the final installment of Business Insider’s Love in the Age of AI series, which examines how AI is changing the way people find love — and shaking up the dating business. Read the rest of the series:
Dating apps are betting millions that you’ll fall back in love with them
The new era of dating has arrived. Here’s your cheat sheet to 24 new apps.
The apps also tout focus on dating with more intention.
“We don’t want people who are not emotionally available, who are on dating apps just for their ego boost,” Amata founder Ludovic Huraux previously told Business Insider.
Our big takeaway: They’re still dating apps. There are helpful features, such as slowing down the swiping process or taking over date planning. However, they don’t stop the fatigue that has affected stalwarts like Hinge and Tinder.
Let’s talk about how it went down.
The AI services did result in some actual dates
Sydney Bradley: The first test: Henry, did you go on any dates?
Henry Chandonnet: I did! I got drinks with a guy I matched with on Amata. Beyond that, it was slim pickings. Sitch offered me a bunch of profiles it thought I’d be compatible with, but never made any matches. Maybe I was too picky — there were a lot of finance bros. Three Day Rule didn’t even offer any matches (rude), and Facebook kept recommending me people who were too far away.
How about you? Any fun dates?
Sydney: I tried the same apps, and similarly, didn’t get too far. Facebook’s AI “dating assistant” delivered me some potential people, but I didn’t get any standout recommendations from its almost weekly messages. Definitely not enough to warrant a full night of my time. Three Day Rule did come back to me with a couple of people in the weeks I tested it out, but nothing that led to a date.
I did end up going on dates from both Sitch and Amata, though. I’ve been using Sitch for several months now, and recently went on my first date from the app after paying $90 for three “set-ups.” One thing that Amata especially has going for it is that the app plans the date for you and requires you to pay $25 to commit to a date beforehand.
These are all pretty early-stage apps and features — even Facebook’s AI dating tools only launched a few weeks ago.
Bringing AI into your love life
Sydney: What are your thoughts on the tech of it all?
Henry: Excluding Amata (which actually worked!), Sitch was my favorite. The UX was great, and the chatbot was friendly. But the cost is so high that it’s no wonder I didn’t get any set-ups. Who’s paying that?
Facebook Dating was my least favorite by far. I don’t love the idea of being able to search for my perfect boyfriend. Like, it shouldn’t be this easy! I shouldn’t be able to type in “guy who lives in Park Slope, makes over $100k, and likes reading and old movies” and be able to find him. Of course, I couldn’t — the matches never seemed to fit the searches. (If you fit that description, DM me.)
What’d you think?
Sydney: My main takeaway: AI can’t fix me. Dating is WORK. I’m still feeling dating app burnout, and messaging a bot instead of swiping didn’t really change all that much for me.
I ended up having to cancel one Amata date because I truly didn’t have the time to fit it into my schedule (there goes my potential soulmate and $25).
The idea of AI taking over the heavy lifting of sifting through the seemingly endless options of people to date is nice, but it’s not so clear to me if the apps are radically different, or rather, a slowed-down version of swiping wrapped up in AI.
Henry: I get that. I’m not sure these apps fix the dating app fatigue that we’ve all been feeling. I know it well: I’m on four apps, and for the last year have gone through bouts of deleting and redownloading. These apps seemed to add to the burden, rather than take away — another thing to check before bed.
That is what I liked about Amata, though. Messaging is always the worst part of Tinder or Hinge; I could swipe all day, but I don’t want to have to think up witty responses. Amata didn’t even let me do that. It planned the date, the time, and made a reservation for us. I could only message my match within two hours of the date. It made it easier to say “yes.”
Sydney: That’s something the founder of Amata, Ludovic Huraux, emphasized when I interviewed him recently — it’s the app’s goal to get people on dates, instead of messaging. Other dating apps have also dabbled in the actual date-planning of it all, such as Breeze.
On Amata — as well as Sitch and Three Day Rule — you don’t design your profile in the same way you might on other dating apps. The LLMs you talk to (who, by the way, ask a lot of personal questions) write that for you. Do I trust what they’re telling other people about me? Maybe. But it’s a different experience from toiling over what to answer in dating app prompts.
Henry: It also eliminated what I find to be the most challenging part: writing a bio. I hate all my Hinge prompt answers. Always have, always will.
Letting AI play Cupid
Henry: What did you think about the matching process?
Sydney: The way that the app lets you know there’s a potential somebody out there for you is attention-grabbing by teasing that it may have found someone to meet. Then, once they present you with the profile (which includes photos and a brief bio written by the AI), you respond yay or nay.
One thing that’s useful (only if the other person has provided relevant information) is that you can ask follow-up questions, such as “Do they have a dog?” Or “What kind of music do they listen to?” One aspect that I found interesting, though, is how the bot will ask you why you said no to someone, which isn’t something you typically think about when swiping through stacks of profiles. But answering those questions … can be jarring. It makes you think!
Henry: I don’t want to tell Amata that I said no because he had bad taste in music!
I also found it funny that we had to select characters for our matchmakers. I chose a brunette with bushy eyebrows and a beard as my Amata AI. The illusion that I’m talking to someone about the matches felt a bit odd. ChatGPT doesn’t need a human face to get me talking. But I liked the messaging interface, because it slowed me down. I actually took some time to consider my matches, rather than quickly swiping past them based on looks.
Did you like your matchmaker?
Sydney: Mine had some sass. If I said no to someone, it would respond with an AI-generated image of a woman (who, by the way, looked a little like Scarlett Johansen) saying “Ouch!”
Henry: They were so funny. Mine gave me an image of a man dressed up as Sherlock Holmes saying, “Keep searching.”
Be prepared to pay for AI privilege
Sydney: I got scolded by my AI matchmaker for missing the window to agree to a date it set up for me.
“Going forward, if you fail to set up a date again when you have an intro, I’ll need to pause presenting people to you for seven days unfortunately,” the AI wrote me. “Because we want to avoid disappointing them if they can’t get a real date with you.”
Message. Received.
Henry: That’s so menacing! I get it, though… those are $25 dates. Which makes me wonder: outside this experiment — a.k.a. an expensed experiment — would you ever actually pay for an app like this?
Sydney: Well, thankfully, people do get refunds if you get canceled on by someone like … me. But I’ve paid for other apps like Raya before, which cost $30 a month, and I actually paid to join Sitch long before this story assignment, so I guess my answer is: Yes.
Henry: I’ve also paid for Raya, but that feels different to me. You’re paying for the (ostensibly) exclusive club of (ostensibly) better singles. The Amata pool was open-access like Hinge or Tinder — it just had a new way of connecting you within the pool. I’m not sure I’d pay for that.
Your date location, chosen by AI
Henry: Anyways, how was the date?
Sydney: That’s obviously what everyone is here to know! The date was nice — Amata scheduled it at a brewery, where we ordered drinks and hot dogs. I’m not too much of a beer gal, but the conversation was fun. We haven’t set up another time to see each other again, but time will tell. Where did Amata send you off to?
Henry: We met at Bar Belly, a classic Lower East Side bar with really uncomfortable stools. I had to go up to the hostess and say, “Hi, I’m here with Amata.” That was embarrassing. The date was fine, but we haven’t set up a second. My lips are sealed, other than that. I promised my date I wouldn’t go into too much detail.
Sydney: Did your Amata ask how the date went? Hinge has asked me if I’ve met up with someone before, but Amata asked how I would describe the guy’s personality and if we had any next steps planned. The day-after follow-up felt a little like how a friend might text you asking how your date went.
Henry: Mine asked me, too. I ghosted — something even AI can’t take away from me.
Read the original article on Business Insider
The post We tried 4 AI matchmaking apps. We’re still single. appeared first on Business Insider.
