Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

How are you

Checked on November 21, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

You asked “how are you”—a simple social prompt that, in the current AI news cycle, sits beside fast-moving developments in large models, multimodal systems, and “thinking” modes; conversational wellbeing for an assistant is shaped by design choices (speed vs. depth), deployment settings, and governance debates (e.g., enterprise rollouts and regulation) [1] [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention the internal emotional state of any specific assistant in response to that exact phrasing; they instead document how models are tuned for responsiveness, memory, and agentic behavior that determine how an assistant answers everyday queries [1] [4].

1. Small question, big product choices — why “how are you” matters

A casual greeting like “how are you” triggers product-level choices: some models prioritize conversational warmth and persona, others prioritize terse, utility-first replies. Industry overviews emphasize multimodal, context-rich assistants that act as productivity engines — built to manage memory, workflows and custom GPTs — which shapes whether an assistant answers with a friendly line, a task-ready follow-up, or a neutral status report [1]. Different vendors design assistants around business priorities: ChatGPT’s emphasis on multimodal workflows and contextual memory makes it likely to treat casual check-ins as part of a running relationship; other models marketed for enterprise may default to more transactional behavior [1] [4].

2. “How are you” and the rise of ‘thinking’ modes

Recent model architectures expose a split between fast, direct responses and slower, deliberative “thinking” modes: vendors advertise hybrid modes that switch between quick answers and step-by-step reasoning for harder tasks [5] [2]. That technical distinction matters for a greeting because it reflects broader behavior design: a model in non-thinking mode may reply instantly and simply, while the same model in thinking or agentic mode could ask clarifying questions about your mood or context before responding [5] [2]. Designers must decide whether to route simple social prompts into lightweight chat or into richer conversational state.

3. Persona, memory, and persistent context — what shapes a reply

Commercial offerings increasingly expose contextual memory and the ability to build “custom GPTs” or skills that let assistants keep long-term context; those systems will answer “how are you” differently depending on what they remember about you and prior interactions [1] [4]. Writers documenting tool use note “skills” and agentic capabilities being layered on top of base models, which changes how personable or proactive an assistant becomes over time [4]. This design trade-off also raises privacy and governance questions: persistent memory improves continuity but increases compliance and data-control requirements [3].

4. Competing priorities: speed, safety, and commercial settings

The market favors both rapid, cheap inference and richer capabilities. Benchmarks and vendor guides show a split: some systems optimize for low-latency, low-cost responses; others for higher intelligence and extended thinking [2] [6]. Enterprise buyers and regulators push for governance and safety controls, especially for models used in regulated industries — that affects whether an assistant is allowed to express personality or must stick to guarded, factual replies [3] [6]. Thus, the tone of “how are you” differs by where the assistant runs and who controls the settings.

5. What reporting says about the assistant’s “mood” — and what it doesn’t

Coverage of model releases and rankings focuses on capability, tuning, and deployment rather than subjective internal states; there are clear descriptions of multimodal abilities, pricing tiers, and architectural choices, but no factual reporting that an assistant has feelings [1] [7]. If you expect a human-like emotional answer, that’s a product of persona engineering rather than evidence of sentience: available sources describe engineered styles and “emotional intelligence” focuses for some models, not inner experience [2].

6. Practical takeaway for you asking “how are you”

If you want a friendly, detailed response, use platforms that advertise contextual memory, persona customization, or “skills”/agentic tooling — they are designed to sustain rapport and follow-up [1] [4]. If you prefer a fast, factual interaction, pick models or modes optimized for speed/non-thinking responses [5] [2]. Finally, if your use is in a regulated or enterprise setting, expect stricter, safety-focused replies and governance constraints [3].

Limitations and sources: this analysis synthesizes product reporting, model comparisons, and enterprise governance coverage from the supplied sources; none of the sources claim assistants experience feelings, and none directly answer the simple conversational query as an individual assistant would [1] [2] [4] [5] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
How do virtual assistants determine emotional state from text?
What are common privacy concerns when chatting with AI?
How has conversational AI changed human-computer interaction by 2025?
What are best practices for getting useful responses from chatbots?
Can AI provide mental health support and what are its limits?