Why do I not see @Kindred_AI as just an AI project, but more like a "relationship experiment"

I have never viewed Kindred within the traditional AI project framework. Not because it doesn't do AI, but because if you only understand it from the perspective of model capabilities and feature iterations, you might miss the point. What truly matters to me about Kindred is not "what it can do," but its attempt to establish a long-term, continuous relationship between users and AI.

This sounds abstract, but it actually involves doing something very concrete: treating "relationship" itself as the core variable of the product, rather than an added experience. Most AI projects address efficiency issues or information retrieval problems—you use it once, the conversation ends, and so does the relationship.

Kindred is different. It’s more like testing whether—if an AI remembers you, responds to you, and changes with interaction—users are willing to continue investing time, even emotional energy. This question cannot be answered simply by model parameters or feature lists.

Because of this, I prefer to see it as an experiment rather than a concluded result. Relationships are inherently unstable and non-linear, and not suitable for validation with short-term data. From this perspective, Kindred focusing early efforts on content and cognition layers rather than just pushing product metrics is a risky but logically coherent choice.

It’s too early to say whether this approach will succeed. But at least, it asks a question more difficult and valuable than "Can AI be smarter?" I will continue to observe what the answer might be.

@Kindred_AI #Kindred #AIAndHuman #DigitalRelationship