I, too, got a "Love" rating in the low single digits. That's probably not too far from the truth in a global sense, but remember that in this case, the API is w

I, too, got a "Love" rating in the low single digits. That's probably not too far from the truth in a global sense, but remember that in this case, the API is working with a local context (HN comments). I'm probably unlikely to have discussed the subject of love on HN, or anything tangentially related to it, or anything that would somehow give an indication of my need for love. Now, if you were to run my Facebook history through the same process, I imagine you'd find a slightly different analysis. To some extent, our personalities are our personalities. We behave, on some level, the same in every context and in every community. But the extent to which that's the case is up for debate. We probably use different approaches, or if you prefer, we show different aspects of our personalities, in different contexts and in front of different groups. That's why it's extremely difficult to take one context (HN, for instance), and extrapolate universal characteristics from it. Even within the set of HN history, I got some oddball results. For instance, Watson considers me very "Fiery" (51%) here. There are plenty of areas in my life in which the word "Fiery" makes a bit of sense. HN isn't one of them.