Slashdot Mirror
Finding Friends Via Search Query Analysis
prostoalex writes "How many times have you met an interesting person, who happened to check out the same book in the library, or listen to the same music as you do? Researchers from University of Chicago suggest that it would be kinda cool if you could find like-minded people by analyzing the queries submitted to a Web search engine. Their PDF paper explains the research in more detail."
So, if the government or a corporation tracks an individuals surfing habits, it's bad. If we do it to get a date, it's good.
Perhaps I'm missing something.
Sipping on Jolt and Dew. Laid back. With my mind of my cubicle and my cubicle on my mind.
The real problem is friends aren't necessary pope with the same interests. Rather it is the combination of similarities and differences that make a successfully friendship. While this might get you started I am not sure it will be that successful.
This sounds like it could be fun/interesting, except there are obvious privacy implications, including, of course, spammers blanketing searches for products, etc. and then trying to contact people who are legitimately using the service. As always, the rule of thumb is to surf anonymously.
I know that some geeks are anti-social, but must we resort to using search engines to find friends? ;-)
How is this any better than joining an IRC channel or a messageboard on the topic you are interested in? Rather than finding people who typed your interest into a search engine, just go on dalnet or something and type /list yourinterest
No no, you don't tell them until years later, say it's because you were looking for the perfect person, and then it's considered on of those "sweet" things.
It's all a matter of perspective.
I remember filling out a 10+ page plus form to find a "like minded person" to room with freshman year. What a crock. So this is some big revelation?!?
You are labouring under a logical flaw: sodomy is always abusive. At least, that's what it seems like you believe, anyway; I don't want to put words in your mouth.
Guess what: the vast, vast majority of relationships of this nature are not abusive at all. No one is denying that forced sex (including that which involves sodomy) is a crime. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about here. Your assertion that sodomy is morally wrong is what I'm denying, NOT the assertion that abusive sexual relationships are wrong. Do you see the difference?
If you are into sanctioning countries or people that condone abusive sexual relationships, then I'm with you. If you make the erroneous assumption that a consensual sexual act is worthy of sanction, because you assume it is necessarily abusive, then I am against you.
Actually, no. This isn't a christian nation.
It may have been originally settled by Puritans, but they weren't the only ones here when the constitution was created. In fact, the constitution expressly forbids discrimination over religion.
If this were simply a christian nation, there would be only one legal religion here.
Of course, this is WAY off topic.
Well yes, I certainly agree - anyone who condones child abuse is a criminal. But anyone who says that what adults do in their own free time, harming no one and giving them (at least some) happiness, is wrong, then you're overstepping the boundaries of protecting the innocent.
For many years, for reasons of my own, I've given money to a women's rape crisis shelter. Obviously, there's no way I would ever condone sexual abuse of any kind; I've made a substantial, material committment against it. So don't think that just because I condone sexual activities that people do in private, activities that you and I might never do in a million years, I condone abusive behaviour. Certainly not.