[AK View]Can Love Be Decided by an Algorithm

Date Drop fever at Stanford University
Nobel-winning matching theory designs romance
Optimized couples... vanished butterflies

These days, every Tuesday at 9 p.m., hundreds of students at Stanford University dormitories in the United States look at their smartphones at the same time. That is when the dating application (app) "Date Drop" introduces them to exactly one potential romantic partner. The app was created by four current students, including student body president Madhav Prakash and computer science master's student Henry Weng. Weng, who played a key role in developing the app, specializes in "matching theory." Matching theory, which prioritizes "preferences" over "prices" and has been recognized for solving real-world problems such as "organ transplant matching" and "school placement," won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2012. Now it is proving powerful in "finding romantic partners" as well.

Within just six months of its launch, Date Drop attracted 5,000 users out of Stanford's 7,500 undergraduates. Its popularity is now spreading to elite universities across the United States, including Harvard, Columbia, and MIT. The app has already secured 3 billion won in initial funding, and many experts predict it could become the next Facebook. The structure of the app is simple. After answering 66 questions about values, political orientation, life goals, communication style, and more, the algorithm recommends exactly one person among all users every Tuesday at 9 p.m. You cannot see the other person's face until you actually meet in person, and you can only chat with that one person for a week. Most existing dating apps like Tinder have been based on swiping photos left or right based on looks. To see more potential matches, users had to pay for unlimited options. Weng said, "I wanted to eliminate the fatigue of show-off profile pictures and unlimited choices."

It is not hard to guess why the app is so popular. For today's younger generation, dating is a huge risk and cost. One awkward confession can make life in your department uncomfortable, and the web of connections involving an ex can be bothersome. There are also worries about crimes such as dating violence and romance scams. Above all, for college students busy with academics and building their resumes, "seeking organic, natural encounters" has already become a luxury. But if there is a daily routine where "an AI algorithm selects a suitable partner every Tuesday," then dating becomes a manageable task that can be scheduled and handled.

However, when people who have been chatting this way finally meet in person, the imagined scenes in their heads momentarily freeze. You are not really sure whether the person chosen by the algorithm can truly be called the optimal match. It is also confusing whether answering 66 questions in good faith to profile yourself is "expressing who I am correctly," or just another way of "packaging myself." In reality, there are couples whose personalities and tastes differ but who still live together in perfect harmony, yet such relationships are impossible within this kind of algorithm.

We have entered an era that tries to optimize even love. Yet what we truly lack is not a better algorithm, but the courage to approach someone while carrying our imperfect selves. Romance inherently involves irrationality and discomfort. In a world where clumsy trial-and-error experiences of showing your heart without overthinking it and then being rejected are filtered out as "inefficiency," what is it that we are really losing? In relationships validated through questionnaires and in encounters where the probability of rejection has been calculated, can we still find what we call "butterflies"? The more I think about it, the more bitter it feels.