The Surreal World of Chatroulette

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Surreal World of Chatroulette

Posted by timothy on Sunday February 21, 2010 @01:11AM from the lick-you-elbow dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "The New York Times reports that Chatroulette, the social Web site created by a 17-year-old Russian named Andrey Ternovskiy, drops you into an unnerving world where you are connected through webcams to a random, fathomless succession of strangers from across the globe. The site activates your webcam automatically; when you click 'start' you're suddenly staring at another human on your screen and they're staring back at you, at which point you can either choose to chat (via text or voice) or just click 'next,' instantly calling up someone else. Entering Chatroulette is akin to speed-dating tens of thousands of perfect strangers — some clothed, some not. You see them, they see you. You talk to them, they talk to you. 'It's very strange, and not just because you are parachuting into someone else's life (and they yours), a kind of invited crasher,' writes Nick Bilton. 'It is also the eerie thrill of true randomness — who, or what, will show up next?' The Web has long allowed anonymous conversations among strangers. Text-based chat rooms are rife with deceit — people pretending they are someone else. Video makes this harder — even if you're wearing a mask. 'From my experience on the site, echoed by those I've spoken to, it seems as if 90 percent of users are genuinely looking for novel and unexpected conversation,' add Bilton. 'The rest — well, let's just say they have debauchery in mind.'"

151 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Hum. by bbqsrc · 2010-02-21 01:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

While this sounds interesting, I believe that somebody has finally found an even more useless form of social networking. A standing ovation for him indeed.

--
Disagree != mod troll.
1. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:49 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I might actually try a few rounds later to completely numb my sense of social anxiety. It sounds like a hell hole of the internet, but I figure I'll come out either a post traumatic vet or completely cured!
2. Re:Hum. by ZorbaTHut · 2010-02-21 02:07 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I'm always curious by people talking about "useless forms of social networking". I mean, what's the supposed purpose of social networking sites? Is there a fixed goal? A constitution? Should we measure a social networking site by how many jobs it fills, or how many dates are had through it?
  As I see it, there are people, and they chat. That's social. That's the essence of humanity.
  How can you get any more, or any less, useful than that?
  In summary: what forms of social networking do you consider "useful", and why?
  
  --
  Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
3. Re:Hum. by bbqsrc · 2010-02-21 02:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'm always curious by people talking about "useless forms of social networking". I mean, what's the supposed purpose of social networking sites? Is there a fixed goal? A constitution? Should we measure a social networking site by how many jobs it fills, or how many dates are had through it?
  As I see it, there are people, and they chat. That's social. That's the essence of humanity.
  How can you get any more, or any less, useful than that?
  In summary: what forms of social networking do you consider "useful", and why?
  The types where actual interaction occurs between two or more human beings with a common understanding of some sort. My understanding of social networking involves some kind of game of watching your number of friends increment.
  
  Basically, I feel social networking destroys the essence of communication: a wall of text, with a photo next to it, passing comment of amusement about a "how long is your dong" survey and seemingly nothing more. I find it hard to believe a real relationship can develop through such a medium.
  
  --
  Disagree != mod troll.
4. Re:Hum. by Eponymous+Coward · 2010-02-21 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  I find it hard to believe a real relationship can develop through such a medium.
  And yet, it happens all the time.
5. Re:Hum. by alexandre_ganso · 2010-02-21 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  I actually married with a girl I've found on fotolog.net six years ago.
  We divorced, and I had a two-year relationship with somenone I found at orkut.
  And I'll marry again with the first one.
  I find even more strange to find someone in a night club, a dance club, whatever, w, where you cannot see nor hear really much. How are ideas exchanged in those places?
6. Re:Hum. by catd77 · 2010-02-21 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  Actually stuff like this has been around for years. Just look at AOL or 4chan /b/.
7. Re:Hum. by bbqsrc · 2010-02-21 03:06 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I actually married with a girl I've found on fotolog.net six years ago.
  We divorced, and I had a two-year relationship with somenone I found at orkut.
  And I'll marry again with the first one.
  I find even more strange to find someone in a night club, a dance club, whatever, w, where you cannot see nor hear really much. How are ideas exchanged in those places?
  I don't think you fully understood my comment, nor your own. I stated that I believe a real relationship cannot flourish on a social networking site. I didn't say you couldn't meet somebody on such a site and get to know them on another medium. I see social networking sites as nothing more than a directory, and apparently, so do you.
  
  --
  Disagree != mod troll.
8. Re:Hum. by troll8901 · 2010-02-21 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  My understanding of social networking involves some kind of game of watching your number of friends increment.
  Back when Friendster was in its heyday, half my friends precisely avoided doing that. I guess they had matured past that stage.
  What are you doing befriending teenagers??
9. Re:Hum. by Alvare · 2010-02-21 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  I find it hard to believe a real relationship can develop through such a medium.
  I think we are gonna have to redefine the meaning of "relationship" in a few years.
  
  --
  4 - A robot may not masturbate, except where such action would conflict with the Second Law.
10. Re:Hum. by DurendalMac · 2010-02-21 03:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I wouldn't say so. An application like Manycam lets you put anything you want into that video feed. Let's just say that the folks over at 4chan have found Chatroulette to be one of the best kinds of trolling as they can not only rape the eyes of their victims, but actually see the reaction for themselves.
11. Re:Hum. by thesandtiger · 2010-02-21 03:59 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I make "off-label" use of social networking sites:
  When live.yahoo.com was up (basically you broadcast a webcam to whoever comes into your channel), I used it to practice several dozen voices, dialects and accents - everything from something simple like a "public school british" accent to insane cartoon voices. I did this by reading books aloud in those voices. I think I had something like 400 people in my channel once when I was reading Mein Kampf doing on the fly translation to pig-latin with an elmer fudd voice. Another time I got over 1000 hits when it was just me staring at the screen (in fact, I was reading on another monitor but people couldn't see that) while drinking beer. What could possibly interest 1000 people in that? Call it performance art.
  On facebook, I use that ONLY for work related people and don't friend anyone who isn't related to work, even if they are friends of mine in real life. It's interesting, to me, to see just how much personal shit people at work are willing to share with me despite our not having a "real" friendship.
  With linked in I do exactly the opposite - I only make links to people I don't work with.
  With chat roulette, it's fantastic as a way to try out different kinds of things. I've done things like pretended my microphone couldn't pick up my voice despite it having no problem picking up the music in the background and a friend off-camera talking to me (most people don't get it - they just think my mic is broken when it obviously isn't), or I just ask questions of people that I would never ask of someone else - usually about bodily functions, their income, things like picking their nose - and it's interesting the responses I get.
  Of course, I also use some of these things (with alternate accounts) in the way that they are intended - as a way to meet and stay in touch with friends - but I think I have more fun being strange than I do otherwise.
  
  --
  Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
12. Re:Hum. by ZorbaTHut · 2010-02-21 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  The types where actual interaction occurs between two or more human beings with a common understanding of some sort.
  
  This does seem to exactly describe the site, though.
  
  --
  Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
13. Re:Hum. by __aasqbs9791 · 2010-02-21 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  ...My understanding of social networking involves some kind of game of watching your number of friends increment...
  What are these 'friends' you speak of? Are they a theoretical mental construct like this 'outside' I sometimes hear about? Or are they more like irrational numbers, useful to certain academic persuits but useless to most people?
14. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 04:54 · Score: 0
  
  Mein Kampf in pig Latin with Elmer Fudd's voice? 10000 internets for you, good sir.
15. Re:Hum. by X0563511 · 2010-02-21 06:18 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I wouldn't. The /b/-tards over on 4chan have known about chatroulette for a while and frequently abuse it.
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
16. Re:Hum. by gakguk · 2010-02-21 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  > Basically, I feel social networking destroys the essence of communication...
  
  Not so fast :)
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVY_Xcl1imA&feature=player_embedded
17. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 07:27 · Score: 0
  
  I know you're joking, but I wouldn't. Social anxiety doesn't respond well to "flooding" - you need to work at it gradually.
18. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  hmm...
  I don't think it does. What I think you are referring to is an eventual 'curiosity' a 'what if' or 'i wonder' which requires the interaction that you don't get from social networking. I think you would probably find (and I have no empirical evidence - hey this is Slashdot right?) that those 'relationships' that do spawn have to start from a point the OP was probably meaning by 'interaction'.
  Unless you can show me someone who managed to have and maintain a relationship (in what I think the OP is saying) by social networking alone?
  You could argue that any kind of pin board in a common room or notice board on a street corner is a form of making relationships in that case. Hell I could be socially interacting with YOU right now based on that logic?
  There is a point where you have to step over/past/around (whatever) the perceived interaction and actually err...interact before you get a relationship. For me this is the fundamental misunderstanding on what 'social networking' means.
19. Re: Hum. by mevets · 2010-02-21 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  | My understanding of social networking involves some kind of game of watching your number of friends increment.
  But in this one, you may get to watch random strangers excrement. Its a different metaphor.
20. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 08:13 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, right... if I'd send my thoughts to strangers about _any_ subject, I'd be an idiot of galactic proportions... that would... I mean... wait a minute... BRB.
21. Re:Hum. by demonlapin · 2010-02-21 08:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Social networking is a way to keep in touch with all those people you knew in high school or college as you drift through life. It's actually pretty cool, as I get to see what happens in the lives of people that would otherwise have fallen off my mental map. And the Rolodex effect is great - those people update their own addresses and phone numbers as they move.
22. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 09:49 · Score: 0
  
  Yes. Yes we do.
23. Re:Hum. by Eil · 2010-02-21 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  My Twitter account is for communicating with my co-workers. Organizing get-togethers, recommending articles, music, local news, etc. My Facebook account is strictly family and close friends. I use it to keep in touch with them in between phone calls, share family photos and videos, and so on. There are lots of people who have accounts on social networking sites who use the sites for their actual purpose: social activity. Just because you haven't found a worthwhile use for social networking doesn't mean social networking sites are altogether useless.
24. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 12:23 · Score: 0
  
  It's entirely anon. Hence no networking. It's just social.
25. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 16:23 · Score: 0
  
  Me too. After I put a bag over my head...
26. Re:Hum. by ClioCJS · 2010-02-21 18:17 · Score: 1
  
  I met my wife online 18 years ago. Another good friend who hangs with us almost weekly I met on OKCupid. I heard about my friend getting shot within hours of it happening, due to Facebook. The social networking naysayers basically belong in the same category as those people in the 90s who said broadband was useless, and the internet's only purpose is for porn.
  Oh, and twitter is only for telling everyone when you take a shit :)
  
  --
  -Clio
  Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
  Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
27. Re:Hum. by DrStoooopid · 2010-02-21 18:28 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. In fact The Game (you all just lost)...but anyway, the game is, put something as foul as you can possibly find into your ManyCam feed and screen shot the other person's reaction. I admit it is a very fun game to play.
  
  --
  There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
28. Re:Hum. by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-02-21 18:57 · Score: 1
  
  1900 called. It wants its "telephone destroys society" FUD back.
29. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 20:29 · Score: 0
  
  But it works both ways, doesn't it ?
  Couldn't this terribly backfire for the /b/tards ?
30. Re:Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 22:59 · Score: 0
  
  Basically, I feel social networking destroys the essence of communication: a wall of text, with a photo next to it, passing comment of amusement about a "how long is your dong" survey and seemingly nothing more. I find it hard to believe a real relationship can develop through such a medium.
  Believe it, because it can and it does.
  I have established plenty of friendships and the odd romance with people who I met in passing while out and about, and got to know better through Facebook interactions.
31. Re:Hum. by jep305 · 2010-02-22 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'm actually pretty happy to let nature take its course and have people drop out of my life when we no longer have any use for each other. One of the benefits of losing touch is that I don't have to give a shit when one of their kids graduates from high school or send any flowers when someone close to them dies. There are a lot of situations in life where you're only involved with people due to your shared circumstances -- college being a great example -- and once that shared circumstance ends, then you really have nothing left in common. I have cousins I don't see for years at a time, and I'm fine with that -- but my mom is pushing me to get on Facebook so that I can "stay in touch". Fuck that... I'm fine being out of touch and hard to find.
  
  --
  In Reason We Trust
32. Re:Hum. by stjobe · 2010-02-22 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'd say post-traumatic. Second click on the "next" button gave me an all-together too close up look at a young man masturbating.
  Not something I enjoy watching, to be quite honest.
  
  --
  "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
33. Re:Hum. by ClashTheBunny · 2010-02-22 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  Yes! http://xkcd.com/591/
34. Re:Hum. by IshmaelDS · 2010-02-22 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  what do you consider a "real relationship"? I have a number of people I have as pen pals, would you consider them "real relationships"? I also have a number of people I have met online in different forums, slashdot(both of which I consider "social networking"), facebook, etc. Would those be considered "real relationships"?
  
  --
  letting an idiot know they are an idiot is not a game... it's a responsibility. - by Kristopeit, M. D. (1892582)
too late by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:18 · Score: 0

This has already been attacked by SomethingAwful and 4chan. Fear the goatse.
1. Re:too late by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:51 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  However, the expressions on the faces of people who are caught unawares...
2. Re:too late by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 10:20 · Score: 0
  
  Casual observation, I never realized there is so much more distance between your nut sack and asshole on fat people.
Cue the spam by Opportunist · 2010-02-21 01:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Hey you! I got cheap Viagra for you! And I don't even have to spell it in funny ways!"
"Hey sweety, I'm naked. Yes even from my waist down. Can't see it? Come to my website and you can, you can even buy these panties I just took off (swirls panties around finger)"
And I'm pretty sure the pennystock- and late-president's-ransom spammers might come up with something really cool where you get to see a quick action movie and the last words of someone being shot right in front of you is the stock to buy or someone you PLEASE contact quickly.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
1. Re:Cue the spam by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:25 · Score: 0
  
  Too late.
2. Re:Cue the spam by Hurricane78 · 2010-02-21 04:48 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Pff, Goatse will have a field day with that site! Until he finds the love of his life: Tubgirl.
  4Chan even more so. Only they will hunt for children while wearing pedobear masks.
  
  --
  Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Obligatory: by bmo · 2010-02-21 01:20 · Score: 4, Funny

'The rest well, let's just say they have debauchery in mind.'
"I put on my robe and wizard hat"
--
BMO
1. Re:Obligatory: by MRe_nl · 2010-02-21 02:39 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  What the f*ck, I told you not to message me again.
  
  --
  "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
2. Re:Obligatory: by dominious · 2010-02-21 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  1. I had a try before and I saw a lot of people wanking in front of the camera...
  
  2. The site was posted on /. earlier today...
  
  3. When a site is posted on /. it gets slashdotted, right?
  
  ...OMG YOU ARE ALL PERVS!!
3. Re:Obligatory: by spartacus_prime · 2010-02-21 15:10 · Score: 1
  
  Shit, I gotta write your names down or something.
  
  --
  If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
4Chan Members by iCantSpell · 2010-02-21 01:21 · Score: 1

I can't wait to see what the pranksters at 4chan are planning.
1. Re:4Chan Members by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:27 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  They're already bored of it.
  No joke. Plenty of rickrolling, disturbing pornography and "gore" spammed over the visual feed with the use of a virtual webcam application. The flood of threads where 4chan showed the reactions of the other person has seemed to wane and the fad is.... over just before the rest of the internet can realize what has happened.
2. Re:4Chan Members by bmo · 2010-02-21 01:28 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I'm not the 14 year old with the Nazi flag in the background, the Red Army greatcoat, Red Army officer's hat (with Nazi SS skull), Douglas-McArthur style sunglasses and pipe, but I wish I was.
  --
  BMO
3. Re:4Chan Members by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:33 · Score: 0
  
  Least it's a bit more innocent than the latest 4chan creation: www.fapmastery.com
  At least chatroulette seems to have honest intentions to start with!
4. Re:4Chan Members by catd77 · 2010-02-21 02:36 · Score: 1
  
  I remember seeing that on /b/ when it first came out. It was pretty funny actually.
5. Re:4Chan Members by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 06:04 · Score: 0
  
  Way ahead of you.
I don't know how to say this but ... by whichpaul · 2010-02-21 01:21 · Score: 4, Funny

... you've got something stuck between your teeth.
WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 01:21 · Score: 1

The site says you have to be at least 16. As if I don't already have enough problems with my kids.Gee, thanks for giving this site publicity.
1. Re:WTF! by Alwin+Henseler · 2010-02-21 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  And this makes a difference, how? Btw. your kids are reading Slashdot?
2. Re:WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 01:46 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  My concern is about pedophiles.
3. Re:WTF! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 01:47 · Score: 0
  
  Hey! I'm 17 and I read slashdot, got a problem with that?
4. Re:WTF! by bmo · 2010-02-21 01:48 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  >My concern is about pedophiles
  Then you're looking in the wrong direction.
  Most child abusers are directly related.
  Pedophiles that are a thousand miles away are not the problem.
  --
  BMO
5. Re:WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Not at all, but don't you think it's my place to protect my kids?
6. Re:WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah my kids read slashdot, and they use fedora too.
7. Re:WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, a parent looks in all directions!
8. Re:WTF! by bmo · 2010-02-21 01:59 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  >Not at all, but don't you think it's my place to protect my kids?
  1. You cannot "protect" them.
  2. You can only teach them to use their heads. This is a teaching moment.
  3. They know more about what's going on than you think.
  4. The Internet is not a baby sitter.
  5. I'll say that again....
  6. The Internet is not a baby sitter.
  --
  BMO
9. Re:WTF! by TheRaven64 · 2010-02-21 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  I'm confused. Two posts earlier, you were claiming it was Slashdot's place to protect your kids by not linking to a site that might potentially allow a pedophile thousands of miles away to see pictures of them. Now you think it's your place. Make up your mind: either take responsibility for your children or put them up for adoption.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
10. Re:WTF! by bmo · 2010-02-21 02:08 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I have the sneaking suspicion that you are a troll instead of simply misinformed, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
  "To Catch A Predator" is not informative. It's not reality. It's a skewed picture of reality, because sensationalism sells.
  Date rape is more prevalent.
  Sexual abuse by those with "power" over kids is more prevalent, c.f., Boston Diocese and Irish Catholic Church sex scandals (and that's just the tip of the iceberg).
  Abuse by a relative is more likely than you think.
  But the last bit never gets much play in the news, because it gets hidden away, because nobody listens to the kids it happens to.
  But hey, what do I know. Go ask a social worker or child advocate. Stop watching so much Teevee. It's bad for your brain.
  --
  BMO
11. Re:WTF! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:26 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Most of the child abusers abuse a child that is related to them or at least already knows them (teacher, priest, ...). This would be more convenient with less risks, for example:
  1. The kid probably already trusts the abuser, so the kid may not tell his/her parents about the abuse.
  2. The abusers does not need to go grab a random kid off a street where (s)he could be seen.
  3. The abuser does not risk that the "kid" online may be a police officer in reality. He already knows the kid and his parents so it is easier to choose the victim (for example, kid is very trusting of others, the parents are alcoholics/drug addicts and care only about the booze/dope and not their kid).
  Well, child abusers sometimes do grab a kid off a street, but they are usually promptly found and put in prison. On the other hand, abuse within the family can last a long time.
12. Re:WTF! by voodoo+cheesecake · 2010-02-21 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, it was a knee jerk reaction on my part. I just didn't expect to find this here. I vented before I thought about it. Living in Alaska kind of messes with your perspective. Read this and maybe you can see why. http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10841687 and to quote, "Another alarming snapshot is the age of sexual assault victims in rural Alaska. Seventy-five percent are younger than 18 and more than half are between 6 and 15 years old,." No, the internet is not a baby sitter, but I am the one who showed them slashdot.
13. Re:WTF! by _Sprocket_ · 2010-02-21 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Hate to break it to you but Slashdot is behind the trend on this one. If this is a big surprise for you, then at least Slashdot posting about it clued YOU in. It may be old news to your kids.
14. Re:WTF! by bmo · 2010-02-21 04:32 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  >No, the internet is not a baby sitter, but I am the one who showed them slashdot.
  Let me clue you into something:
  If it's in the New York Times and it's Internet related, it's no longer news. Associating the any internet phenomena with sexual assault is not helpful, because even in your own article you just posted, I will bet you that the *vast* majority of those sexual assaults are between people who know each other in real life and would have happened with or without the Internet.
  You cannot "protect" your kids from the Internet. They will see stuff you don't approve of at friends' houses. They will see stuff you don't approve of while at the Library. They will see and do stuff in real life that you don't approve of. The only thing you can do is to teach common sense, and better yet, maybe even enroll them into a self-defense or martial arts course if Alaska is the "rape capital of the US."
  Enrollment in a self defense course is useful. Getting all excited over perceived threats is not.
  If you wrap your kids in a cocoon, you are doing nothing but harming them. The kids who grow up that way do not learn any coping skills whatsoever.
  --
  BMO
15. Re:WTF! by martas · 2010-02-21 04:38 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  you son of a bitch! i lost some precious tabs because of that. (porn, mostly. but still, i worked very hard to find them...)
  
  --
  weinersmith
16. Re:WTF! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  chatroulette is a great baby sitter...there will always be someone watching your kids!
  I just pointed my webcam at a TV playing olympic coverage and the only times people seemed to stick around were the people with no active camera...the masturbating dudes never stopped...and I never came across a masturbating woman
17. Re:WTF! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 10:38 · Score: 0
  
  that's what no script is for. learn the tools available, and use them. (you can always whitelist slashdot/fsdn and other pages you want js on)
18. Re:WTF! by The+End+Of+Days · 2010-02-21 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  Slashdot is behind every trend. Since about 6 years ago the only reason to come to this site is to nerdbait in the comments, and even that isn't really all that much fun. Nerd reactions are sadly too predictable.
19. Re:WTF! by _Sprocket_ · 2010-02-22 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  And all that would probably be a lot more entertaining if the trolls were half as clever as they thought they were.
99% Debauched by sofayam · 2010-02-21 01:22 · Score: 4, Informative

... is what I saw. Had a short chat with a guy from Brazil - short because we did not share a language - other than that just a flashing sequence of monkey spanking exhíbitionists.

--
sofa -- so good
1. Re:99% Debauched by Neuroelectronic · 2010-02-21 02:42 · Score: 0
  
  Hahah, guess what. They teach English in Brazilian schools. I've had lengthy conversations with several Brazilians on Omegle.
2. Re:99% Debauched by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:56 · Score: 0
  
  Hahah, guess what. They teach English in Brazilian schools. I've had lengthy conversations with several Brazilians on Omegle.
  As a Brazilian, I can assure you that even though they teach English at Brazilian schools, the vast amount of Brazilians (90%+) don't come out of it with enough knowledge to say anything more complicated than "the apple is red."
  If you're wondering, I leaned my English from my American parents.
3. Re:99% Debauched by Laebshade · 2010-02-21 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  In high school, a Brazilian by the name of Diego (go Diego, go!) came to America via the foreign exchange program and started at our high school. He didn't speak much English when he got there, but by the end of the first year, he was throwing insults and having all most complete conversations. Just goes to show that complete immersion into a culture is the best way to learn it's language. No, I don't know if he learned any English before he came to the U.S.
4. Re:99% Debauched by WillDraven · 2010-02-21 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Well, they DID just get linked on slashdot...
  
  --
  This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
5. Re:99% Debauched by yuriks · 2010-02-21 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  I've been on the internet since a early age (8 years old or so) and learned most of my English from browsing forums and other websites in English. I've got to the point where I actually prefer English rather than Portuguese for most of my tasks that don't involve communicating with others and most people online or on IRC compliment me on my English, saying I'm barely distinguishable from a native user of the language. That extends to a certain point to spoken conversation too, I can understand and speak fluently, though pronunciation of words is still off. Goes to show that culture immersion really works for learning languages.
6. Re:99% Debauched by LanMan04 · 2010-02-22 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, if you hadn't told me otherwise I would have assumed you were a native English speaker (or typer in this case).
  Nice job!
  
  --
  With the first link, the chain is forged.
7. Re:99% Debauched by ConceptJunkie · 2010-02-22 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, if you want to sound like a native English speaker from America, you're going to need to misspell more words and use poorer grammar. ;-)
  Seriously, your story is fascinating and from your short paragraph it appears to me that you have been successful in assimilating our language. I guess this is another example that shows English really is the "lingua franca" of the Internet.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
8. Re:99% Debauched by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-22 06:45 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I saw a bunch of funny posts about how interesting and groundbreaking this chatroulette thing was, so I logged on to check it out.
  In less than a minute I had to next through six different dudes jerking off.
  Found a few random people to chat with, and a ton of people with their cameras disabled or just showing a blank area.
  Obviously like everyone else I'd rather talk to a girl, but I'd say after a dozen cocks show up on the screen and the rest of the people asking for tits,
  most self respecting girls are going to run away from this app.
Seems more of an Interesting idea than the usual by HNS-I · 2010-02-21 01:25 · Score: 1

Of course this opens up a can of worms though. Advertisements, flashers and such. Atleast this should have some categorisation like: random, comedy normal talk, different age and sex groups etc. The rating system is pretty straightforwars, people that keep getting clicked away in a certain category just don't get presented to people in that category.
Experience Chatroulette w/o "exposing" yourself! by wisebabo · 2010-02-21 01:27 · Score: 4, Informative

If you want to get a feeling of Chatroulette without "exposing" yourself (or getting exposed to some pretty shocking imagery) you might want to check out this blog:
http://chatroulette.tumblr.com/
He's been collecting dozens (hundreds) of screencaptures that people have been e-mailing him. While you'll still see some disturbing things at least you'll know this isn't happening to YOU, LIVE and hopefully the lack of immediacy will dull the shock a bit. If you can take that, then by all means take the plunge!
(I'm too chicken and have not). By the way, I got this link from TechCrunch, so just wanted to give them credit.
Absolute Nonsense by TheRaven64 · 2010-02-21 01:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

Text-based chat rooms are rife with deceit — people pretending they are someone else. Video makes this harder — even if you're wearing a mask
You can lie just as effectively in video chat and in text chat about everything except your appearance. All this quote tells us is that the person who wrote it considers physical appearance to be the most important attribute. I think this says a lot more about the writer than the text chats. The person on the end of a video chat can still be lying about their occupation, hobbies, age, even location. If they're wearing a mask, as he suggests, they can be lying about just about anything except their weight (and possibly even that if it's a close-up).

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
1. Re:Absolute Nonsense by hitmark · 2010-02-21 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  welcome to the modern world. Heck, kennedy won thanks to tv.
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
2. Re:Absolute Nonsense by John+Hasler · 2010-02-21 01:56 · Score: 1
  
  > You can lie just as effectively in video chat and in text chat about
  > everything except your appearance.
  Of course you can lie about your appearance. You can send out whatever video you think might be amusing.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
3. Re:Absolute Nonsense by dr2chase · 2010-02-21 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget that the guy he beat, turned out to be a sneaky weasel. You take your communication where you find it -- written, audio, video, it's all prepared for, tweaked, filtered, selected, and edited.
4. Re:Absolute Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 14:41 · Score: 0
  
  I'm pretty sure the point was that with video, 35 year old men aren't going to get anyone to believe they are hot teen girls. I get where you went with it, but wtf were you talking about? Why do you nerds feel the need to show off your "superiority" on every goddam topic?
5. Re:Absolute Nonsense by Pikkebaas · 2010-02-22 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  Gender/age is a part of physical appearace? Wow.
6. Re:Absolute Nonsense by hitmark · 2010-02-26 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  thats the thing tho, he was a wellspoken sneaky weasel. But as media shifted from radio to tv, looks overpowered...
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
Debauchery by Alcoholist · 2010-02-21 01:39 · Score: 1

Debauchery makes the world go 'round. Who knew?

--
Bibo Ergo Sum.
Is randomness the antidote to group think? by Z8 · 2010-02-21 01:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

As people have pointed out before, this system may have already been co-opted by spammers and such, but I like the idea of being connected to people at random. The internet was supposed to have broadened everyone's horizons by allowing communication between people of different countries, backgrounds, etc. But then everyone just found the people who reinforce their pre-existing opinions. So sure, I'm talking with someone around the world, but we're both, say, talking about linux wifi drivers and complaining about the same company. It's arguably worse for political thought, where either corporations control mainstream thought, and/or conspiracy theorists only pay attention to the one blog with the same conspiracies.
People need more opportunities for true randomness, where they actually do sample evenly from the world's population and interact with someone.
1. Re:Is randomness the antidote to group think? by greyhueofdoubt · 2010-02-21 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  If you are looking to meet random people from around the world, try http://www.flork.com/
  I've had some fun conversations with people from england, kyrgyzstan, brazil, new york city, etc. I don't recall ever seeing spam or anything like that.
  -b
  
  --
  No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
2. Re:Is randomness the antidote to group think? by Tromad · 2010-02-21 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  Is there even a social networking site ala /., reddit, or digg for political centrism (or not even centrism, but "open")? /. is probably the most moderate (libertarians mixed with socialists, each a little crazy), but it seems like I either have to choose hard right or hard left and I'm ready to just say screw it altogether because I'm tired of the propaganda.
3. Re:Is randomness the antidote to group think? by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-02-21 19:58 · Score: 1
  
  But only on /. you can compose carefully crafted posts that troll both libertarians and socialists at the same time! ~
  The real fun starts when they both reply calling you a moron, and then discover each other in comments...
4. Re:Is randomness the antidote to group think? by Tromad · 2010-02-21 21:43 · Score: 1
  
  Actually I'd probably describe myself as a libertarian socialist, but that is on a large scale as likely as pure communism or capitalism, so on a lot of major issues I take what I believe a to be a moderate position.
This is nothing by aepervius · 2010-02-21 01:51 · Score: 1

I read the web site, and I saw nothing which was remotely even scratching the depth of perversity. Maybe I am "hardened" by years of browsing and stumbling onto distrubing stuff.

You want disturbing ? Try google sepuku Google Sepuku

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
1. Re:This is nothing by Opportunist · 2010-02-21 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  I tried, but either I don't know any good kanji to enter or I end up with fairly normal shit. Well, normal by my standards.
  I've been on the 'net for almost two decades. There is nothing left that could even remotely gross me out.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
2. Re:This is nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:22 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  You sure? I said the same thing until I stupidly saw videos posted by these guys:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs
  Nearly vomited.
  (link isn't clickable on purpose)
3. Re:This is nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 05:18 · Score: 0
  
  A word of warning, I opened and read that link with elinks, just to be safe.
  It turns out, the wording and description of the events is the terribly disturbing part...
4. Re:This is nothing by commodoresloat · 2010-02-21 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe I am "hardened" by years of browsing and stumbling onto distrubing stuff.
  Hey, whatever turns you on, man, but if it takes years, there's a good chance you're doing it wrong...
5. Re:This is nothing by demonlapin · 2010-02-21 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Really? It's reprehensible behavior, but the video is less disgusting than a lot of pus videos that are out there. It's just a guy getting his head bashed in. YMMV: I'm a doctor, I took gross anatomy, and I have personally sawed a woman in half between the pelvis and abdomen, cut the legs free from one another, and washed out the formaldehyde-preserved contents of her rectum. NOTHING shocks me. (Smells are still disgusting.)
6. Re:This is nothing by jimnorcal · 2010-02-22 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  Holy yuk! Yea, that's one reason (and I've given it serious thought in the past) that I could never be a doctor. That image of the guy who got ripped in half while driving his little car and running head on into a big truck was too much for my fragile eyes to handle and when I consider the potential odors around traumas like that... I knew right then for sure I could never go into the medial profession. I'm glad for those that can and do, however. Thanks doc.
"You see them, they see you." by John+Hasler · 2010-02-21 01:53 · Score: 1

Only if you have a camera and it is turned on and pointed at you. It would be trivial to arrange for them to see whatever you want them to see.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:Experience Chatroulette w/o "exposing" yourself by TapeCutter · 2010-02-21 01:53 · Score: 1

Thanks, I was thinking of fixing a snack until I saw that guy holding his gut in the air.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
A mixed bag... by Fuzi719 · 2010-02-21 01:58 · Score: 1

Of course I've seen the bizarre and depraved on Chatroulette, but I've also met and chatted with a couple of people that have turned out to be very nice guys. We've added each other to our Live Messenger friends and now chat on a daily basis, sharing pictures of our hometowns (Lisbon, Istanbul, Atlanta) and learning about each other's cultures and daily lives. What a great way to spend a few minutes each day.
Is this really that revolutionary? by allknowingfrog · 2010-02-21 02:00 · Score: 0

Is anyone really surprised someone finally offers this service? It's basically omegle with webcams. It's not a real stretch to go from anonymous chatroom to random chatroom to random webchat.
NY Times? by Kanel · 2010-02-21 02:05 · Score: 1

Something has changed in the world, if our source for the latest internet phenomenas is the New York Times. It's as if I've become my parents, learning of hackers via a botched newspaper report or this here "Internet Chat" thingy from watching Ally McBeal.
1. Re:NY Times? by bmo · 2010-02-21 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  True. Once it hits the NYT, it's no longer innovative and news for nerds.
  It's been a long time since Slashdot actually had stories ahead of the NYT.
  --
  BMO
yeah thanks for that by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:06 · Score: 1, Funny

First image was of some dudes unit, and that will be the end of that service for me.
1. Re:yeah thanks for that by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:14 · Score: 0
  
  Wife just gave it a try and got three "banana men" in a row. nasty, I think she puked in her mouth a little from the look on her face.
Re:Experience Chatroulette w/o "exposing" yourself by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:28 · Score: 0

Oh, I get it, it's just like TV!
Re:Experience Chatroulette w/o "exposing" yourself by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:32 · Score: 0

The Hitler one wins.
All I see are young men and cocks being stroked by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 02:32 · Score: 0

It's a lovely idea, but oh my goodness there are so many cocks on display! It's a bit of a silly waste of time ...
Not spam by schon · 2010-02-21 02:41 · Score: 1

As much as I hate spam, that's not spam. As the "marketer" can only talk to one person at a time, there is no "bulk", so no spam.
If someone hacked it so that they could answer hundreds (or thousands) of connections simultaneously (maybe with a recorded message), then it would be spam.
OK, I just gave spammers an idea. I'm going to hell.
1. Re:Not spam by troll8901 · 2010-02-21 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  OK, I just gave spammers an idea.
  I think most spammers don't bother reading Slashdot - they'll have to spend 3 hours reading our posts to get 1 good idea. After all, half our posts are the usual - we make jokes, praise Apple products, complain about Apple fanboys, thank NYCL, flame NYCL, and sometimes write long and insightful posts which even the rest of us sometimes skip reading.
  
  I'm going to hell.
  Stop making jokes like this - it's worrying poor Alsee (515537). He's concerned about the dismal minimum requirements for entry. He said, "Oh jeez. They're letting everybody in these days."
rerun by Alrescha · 2010-02-21 03:01 · Score: 1

In 2006, this was called "Serendipitous Chat", which also had it's amusing moments.
A.

--
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
Omegle + Video by Arancaytar · 2010-02-21 03:17 · Score: 1

Is that basically it?
Children? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 03:32 · Score: 1, Interesting

What about children getting on this naked?
Is every person who gets randomly connected to them automatically guilty of possession of child porn?
Around the world by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 04:02 · Score: 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoDjJRL3Hnw
LOL by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 04:08 · Score: 0

Mac users will love it!
Ah just what I wanted to see first thing Sunday by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 04:20 · Score: 0

A naked fat Korean man in clown make up masturbating.
God-damned French by hadhad69 · 2010-02-21 04:26 · Score: 1

WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON i get about 50 submissions a day on this thing - and recently at least 10 a day are just RANDOM FUCKING IMAGES - like a picture of a rainbow, a cartoon, a photo of some dude DJingand nearly all of them are from french people. dear french, WHY THE FUCK are you submitting random unrelated images to this blog? it is pretty fucking obvious what it is about, please stop wasting my time.
lol

--
If you can read this, it's already too late.
90%? No way by VShael · 2010-02-21 04:33 · Score: 3, Informative

I read an article about chatroulette and decided to try it out for myself.
I'd say 75% of people were not interested in conversation of any kind. And maybe 10% were interested in trying to shock you in some way.
The system is open for scamming from people who will beam your webcams output back at you, or pics of goatse.cx or shock pages from encyclopedia dramatica. It might have been a fun conversing tool when there was less than 5000 people on it. But once the crowd from 4chan heard of it, it's too polluted to be fun. (Think Usenet before and after AOL came online)
1. Re:90%? No way by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 06:37 · Score: 0
  
  I disagree. The thing you call "pollution" is the only real fun to be had on there.
  That being said, in 10hrs or being on the site, I've had one real conversation (and it was only ~10 mins). Oh, and I aired a Lost episode on there for a Lost fan from Germany.
  Trolling is the only thing the site is truly good for.
  People aren't there to talk, at all. People are there to see boobs/dick and to pretend they're funny/on tv. It is a truly useless site and is proof that we are doomed.
  The only people who make it entertaining in the least are the trolls.
How did you know I use a Mac? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 04:44 · Score: 0

Fucker.
Awesome, this is linked from slashdot by 1155 · 2010-02-21 05:34 · Score: 1

I was already seeing naked guys:naked girls at a ratio of 1000:1 on chatrt.
Now that slashdot has linked it (multiple times I believe) it's going to increase to 10000000:1. Thanks for ruining yet another decent portion of the internet! First gopher, now chatrt. What's next?
1. Re:Awesome, this is linked from slashdot by FiloEleven · 2010-02-21 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  Wait...so, 1000:1 was a good ratio?
  
  --
  Your brain is not a computer.
2. Re:Awesome, this is linked from slashdot by Arimus · 2010-02-21 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Better than what it will become now its got wider publicity ....
  Think good is a relative term in this instance.
  
  --
  --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
3. Re:Awesome, this is linked from slashdot by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 10:16 · Score: 0
  
  Actually the ratio is more like 50:1. The trick is that most of the girls don't start naked but they want to be. They just need to make sure you are not a total creepster first. Watch out though because most of them are like 16 years old.
4. Re:Awesome, this is linked from slashdot by FiloEleven · 2010-02-21 15:37 · Score: 1
  
  No, I get it. It's like how I'd rather lose a pinky finger than a whole hand. But when there is a third option available, not losing any extremities whatsoever, I find complaints about the first two options a bit silly.
  All I'm saying is, if the ratio is already 1000:1, I wouldn't be calling it "yet another decent portion of the internet." Maybe I'm just strange.
  
  --
  Your brain is not a computer.
Sounds like fun... by KingTank · 2010-02-21 05:36 · Score: 1

...until you realize you'll spend most of your time talking to nude men and people who want to sell you something.
1. Re:Sounds like fun... by operator_error · 2010-02-21 06:17 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Andy Grove said, 'is Thomas Edison such an overachiever for inventing the lightbulb? ...Because if if he didn't do it, it was inevitably going to be invented by someone.'
  Personally, I haven't been paying attention, but I thought Skype already made this possible, and clearly I was wrong.
  Wiring up random videocams with each other was bound to happen sooner or later. Duh. This is like basic Darwinian smut technology.
  Don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain; in this case it seems to be a pretty cool 17 year old kid who is just as amazed as you or I would be. Good for you kid!
  And the global anonymous internet, once given random-video-chat-technology? Well, what were you expecting?
Reputation? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 06:58 · Score: 0

I cannot help but think that a site like this could *REALLY* use a good reputation system.
Tried it, wasn't too disappointing by NiteMair · 2010-02-21 07:10 · Score: 2, Informative

I tried it... after seeing a lot of naked "boy" chests (clearly a lot of high school or college kids showing off their "six pack") it finally stopped on a guy that looked reasonable to chat with.
Chatted with him for about 10-15 mins, just exchanging some random questions and info. Wasn't too bad, except he was from China and his english wasn't so great :)
Overall, definitely has potential for some random social interaction if you have nothing better to do.
Live music by simpleguy · 2010-02-21 07:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

Among all the guys who were showing their wang, one of my strangers was from France and playing the accordion live. I brought my 4 month old baby to listen and enjoy and we had some nice conversation after that. That alone compensated for the idiocy of the rest.
1. Re:Live music by Jedi+Alec · 2010-02-21 11:40 · Score: 1
  
  So if he was among the guys showing their wang...he was doing that, and playing the accordeon at the same time?
  
  --
  
  People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Not so anonymous by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 08:16 · Score: 0

CR is using Red5 with Flash P2P between the connected clients. The "anonymous' masturbators' IP addresses are shared with the viewing side. I tracked three "conversations" and geolocated their IP for proof-of-concept. Credit to the 17-yo for getting this out, but that's a pretty big fail for an "anonymous" chat site.
wow, flashback! by Tumbleweed · 2010-02-21 09:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

This reminds me of the beginning of Logan's Run.
1. Re:wow, flashback! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-22 05:45 · Score: 0
  
  exactly! me too!
  had to scroll down a bit before I said the same thing because I knew I couldn't have been the only one to think of that movie. Too bad it probably won't be full of hot girls all the time, walking into your living room (or bedroom) after they show up. But, it is a start. :) Time to start building Box huh?
Re:Seems more of an Interesting idea than the usua by xenn · 2010-02-21 09:32 · Score: 1

more like a can of wormholes.
If you want to experience freaks by Snaller · 2010-02-21 09:32 · Score: 1

Just visit the world of warcraft forums - thankfully you can't see what they look like!

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Thanks! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 12:11 · Score: 0

g8. Now you can get BOTH dating tips and children developing tips rite here on /.
I used to think differently, but now I just follow the HURD.
ASSSSSS BURRRRRGERS by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-21 13:49 · Score: 0

It's simple, the superior Slashdot self-diagnosed assburgers victim is beyond needing mere social
interaction and must denigrate it at every turn.
Idea: by dushkin · 2010-02-21 20:21 · Score: 1

Naked Chatroulette, where people troll others by appearing clothed on camera.

--
o hai
netmeeting by access.name · 2010-02-22 01:41 · Score: 1

So, chat with random strangers using webcams? I was doing this using netmeeting around year 2000 or before, if I remember correctly. Also, joining any irc server and then adding random strangers to a throwaway msn messenger account allowed the exact same. Isn't this doable since webcams were invented? What is the novelty here? The simple interface?
what's with the random quote generator? by circletimessquare · 2010-02-22 03:22 · Score: 1

at the bottom of the slashdot page?
currently it says
One of the large consolations for experiencing anything unpleasant is the knowledge that one can communicate it. -- Joyce Carol Oates
i feel no need for thought. the entire subject matter has been digested and summarized

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Re:Experience Chatroulette w/o "exposing" yourself by jimnorcal · 2010-02-22 05:55 · Score: 1

Scrolling down that page caused me to laugh into tears. What the hell is wrong with people!?
Not bad but... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-04 03:32 · Score: 0

The concept of chatroulette is nice! Getting people together is always nice! :) But i prefer FaceBuzz! It's the same thing except they have a porn filter and other nice features! It's a bit faster also! If you get tired of seeing dicks all the time you should check it out! :P FaceBuzz.com!