\documentclass[11pt]{article}

\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{xcolor}

\titleformat{\section}{\large\bfseries}{}{0em}{}
\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
\hypersetup{
  colorlinks=true,
  linkcolor=black,
  urlcolor=blue!50!black
}

\begin{document}

\begin{center}
{\LARGE\textbf{Why I Keep Coming Back to Overtone}}\\[6pt]
{\large A longer working note}\\[10pt]
Alessandro Fiume\\
March 16, 2026
\end{center}

\vspace{0.4cm}

Justin and team,

I did not want to send a generic application into a company like this. That would have been easy, and also a bit pointless.

What pulled me toward Overtone was the goal: use AI to help people form real relationships, not spend more time in another app.

\section{Why this mission hit me}

Part of the reason Overtone stayed with me is that I had already been circling a neighboring version of the same problem.

Over the last year I started working on a separate project called ActiveCrew, a social-sports idea built around helping people actually meet in real life. It began with sports, but the deeper motivation was broader: too many people want more real life than they are actually getting.

Working on that project kept pushing me toward the same questions:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item What makes someone say yes in theory but not in practice?
    \item How much of follow-through is about desire, and how much is about friction?
    \item What makes an invitation feel safe, timely, and worth acting on?
    \item How do you build trust before people have met?
\end{itemize}

That is part of why Overtone landed so strongly for me. I could see, even from the outside, that you were taking seriously the gap between digital interest and real-world connection.

\section{Why I worked through Hinge instead of pretending I know Overtone}

There is a simple reason this note leans on Hinge work: Overtone is still private, and I do not know what you are already building internally.

So rather than fabricate certainty, I tried to be disciplined.

I asked myself: what is the closest public product where I can pressure-test my thinking? The obvious answer was Hinge. Not because Overtone will simply be ``Hinge plus AI'' --- I do not think that --- but because Hinge is the clearest public reference point for the last important correction in this category: away from swipe economics and toward something more intentional.

So I used that as a working ground.

\section{What my Hinge work kept teaching me}

I worked through Hinge across two connected product exercises:

\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item customer segmentation and unmet needs
    \item ideation and feature selection
\end{enumerate}

The target segment we focused on was relationship-minded Hinge users, roughly ages 25 to 32, who had been on the app for months and were not failing because they were unserious. They were failing because something in the pipeline between matching and an actual relationship kept breaking down.

We kept coming back to three unmet needs:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item \textbf{From match to meet.} People need help getting from conversation to an actual date before interest decays.
    \item \textbf{Authentic self-expression.} People want to show more of who they really are than a neat profile usually captures.
    \item \textbf{Algorithm trust.} People want to feel the system is on their side, not just optimizing for activity.
\end{itemize}

Out of those three, the one that kept feeling most urgent to me was the first.

Not because the other two do not matter. They do. But because the gap between a promising conversation and an actual date feels like the place where good intention goes to die.

That was the reason our team ended up choosing the \textbf{48-Hour Date Challenge} as the strongest feature direction. Out of 13 ideas, that was the one that seemed most directly aimed at the structural bottleneck. Not prettier profiles. Not better explanation layers. A cleaner bridge from in-app interest to a real meeting.

I do \emph{not} mean that Overtone should build that exact feature. That would be a silly claim to make from outside the room.

What I do mean is that when I was forced to work concretely, not philosophically, my thinking kept converging on the same choke point: too many systems are good at generating possibility and much weaker at helping the right people actually meet.

\section{Why the direction makes sense to me}

What stands out to me is the layer Overtone seems to want to learn from.

The last era of the category became extremely good at collecting the easiest signals:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item taps
    \item swipes
    \item likes
    \item replies
    \item time in app
\end{itemize}

Useful signals, yes. But shallow ones.

The better signal lives later in the journey:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item who follows through
    \item who actually meets
    \item whose interest gets stronger in person instead of weaker
    \item which introductions create momentum rather than fizzle
\end{itemize}

That is why Overtone feels different to me. From what is public, it seems to be aiming at the part of the journey that matters more.

I am not saying that as if I know what you are building internally. I do not. I am saying the public direction makes sense, and I would want to work around a team pushing on it.

\section{Where I think I could actually help}

I am not trying to apply into a senior role by force. The roles on the site are senior, and I know that.

What I am trying to do is make a serious case that I could be useful around a team like this.

I do not think my value would come from showing up with a grand theory and pretending I know more than people who have been living inside this problem for years.

I think it would come from doing the work that makes senior people faster:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item talking to people and listening well
    \item noticing patterns that are easy to miss when everyone is moving fast
    \item doing operational work with care instead of treating it as beneath strategy
    \item turning loose research and product signal into something decision-ready
    \item helping with the blurry overlap between product, pilot operations, and go-to-market
\end{itemize}

At Bloomberg, I spent time in analytics and client-facing product work. In school, I gravitated toward product because I like the mix of structure and ambiguity. And in my own projects, including ActiveCrew, I keep ending up in the same zone: where something is still half-built and needs real work.

\section{What I would be excited to help push on}

If I had the opportunity to contribute, these are the kinds of questions I would be excited to work on:

\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item How do you reduce the friction between a good introduction and an actual meeting without making the experience feel robotic?
    \item What signals tell you someone is genuinely ready to meet now, rather than just browse?
    \item Once something happens in real life, what is the lightest useful feedback loop that makes the system smarter?
    \item Where does the narrative resonate, and where does it get muddy, when real people encounter the product?
\end{enumerate}

Those are not ``my answers.'' They are the kinds of live questions I would want to help move forward.

\section{Why I chose this format}

I chose this format because a resume alone would mostly tell you where I studied and where I interned.

That matters, sure, but it hides the part that feels most relevant here:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item how I think
    \item what kinds of problems I naturally gravitate toward
    \item how seriously I would work on a mission like this
\end{itemize}

This note, the page, the linked Hinge work, all of that is my attempt to show rather than tell.

\section{Practical note}

I can be full-time from June through September. After that I have one semester left. If there were real fit, I would want to continue part-time through fall 2026 and, ideally, full-time after graduation. I graduate in January 2027 and will be STEM OPT eligible.

\section{Closing}

I respect what you are trying to build, and I would love the chance to be useful around a team taking that swing.

Not in a vague ``happy to help anywhere'' way. In a real way: on the ground, in the details, doing the work well.

\vspace{0.4cm}

Best,\\
Alessandro Fiume\\
\href{mailto:alessandro.fiume@columbia.edu}{alessandro.fiume@columbia.edu}\\
+1 202 864-9917

\end{document}
