Slashdot Mirror
'Dating' Site Imports 250k Facebook Profiles
mark72005 sends this snippet from Wired:
"How does a unknown dating site, with the absurd intention of destroying Facebook, launch with 250,000 member profiles on the first day? Simple. You scrape data from Facebook. At least, that's the approach taken by two provocateurs who launched Lovely-Faces.com this week, with profiles — names, locations and photos — scraped from publicly accessible Facebook pages. The site categorizes these unwitting volunteers into personality types, using a facial recognition algorithm, so you can search for someone in your general area who is 'easy going,' 'smug' or 'sly.' ... [The creators] say they will take down a user’s profile if a person asks, and the site doesn’t have any indication they are actually trying to make any money. Instead, it’s part of a series of prank sites, the first two of which aimed at Google and Amazon, intended to make people think more about data in the age of internet behemoths. Moreover, it’s a bit funny hearing Facebook complain about scraping of personal data that is quasi-public."
But if someones wife happens along and sees their spouse on a new dating site there's gonna be hell to pay for this particular " joke"
Aren't photos copyrighted? So wouldn't this be a trillion dollar copyright violation?
Oh wait, we learned that copyright vio gets cheaper in bulk.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
itâ(TM)s part of a series of prank sites, the first two of which aimed at Google and Amazon, intended to make people think more about data in the age of internet behemoths
Making it a Facebook app would have largely defeated the point. The impact is made greater by removing the data from the context of Facebook entirely and putting it up somewhere else in another context.
Already /.ed... jeeze. With 250,000 "users" they should be able to handle a small slashdotting, right?
It's seems their "facial recognition algorithm" has categorized me as a "stalker" and "potential date-rapist"!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Those people running the site behind the "make people think more about data" link should be made to think more about server capacity
Gee, what are the chances that the Facebook Terms of Service explicitly forbids scraping all the profile data and using it on another website? These two guys are probably going to have their Facebook accounts canceled! Other than that, I'm not sure what recourse Facebook has.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
This is illegal in pretty much every country on earth who has laws, it's called identity theft, making false profiles on behalf of someone is without doubt the stupidest idea I've ever heard of when trying to make a point. And on top of that state that "you can contact us if you want your profile removed". No scrubs, it should say "you can contact us if you want us to have your picture and profile on the lamest site of the century".
The Social Network movie captured the original Zuckerberg hack described in the Harvard Crimson. They just did it on a larger scale.
Isn't this how facebook got its initial data too? By scraping the websites of Universities for student profiles.
No. It started by only allowing university students with specific .edu addresses to join, starting with only Harvard and then expanding to more and more colleges before they finally opened it up to High School students and then anyone. It was limited to universities because Zuckerburg's own social network was a university and they are a good target demographic, not because they had pages to pre-scrape user data from. To my knowledge no college would post such user data on a public website anyways as it'd be an extreme breach of that student's privacy.
When I was a member of Yahoo Personals, I was always sure to report users who had photos of famous porn stars for their profiles. Then I found out that Yahoo was responsible for the fake profiles:
http://plentyoffish.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/yahoo-class-action-lawsuit-settled/
Apparently, dating sites are still playing the same old game.
>Other than that, I'm not sure what recourse Facebook has.
If they agreed to those TOS and then violated them, possibly quite a lot.
Not that I'm even slightly a fan of 88 page long TOS "by clicking here I agree I've read and accept all of the above" agreements, they are often enforceable.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
A dating site's value is directly correlated with how many other members sign up. Ergo a new competitor trying to get into the big-picture marketplace either needs to create fictional people to attract members, or they need to pull in people who didn't intend to sign up to get things going.
Mark Zuckerberg, for all his many faults, started the right way - serve a tiny market that generally is looking for other people in that market.
I am officially gone from
No, this is how it started:
According to The Harvard Crimson, the site was comparable to Hot or Not, and "used photos compiled from the online facebooks of nine houses, placing two next to each other at a time and asking users to choose the 'hotter' person".
Mark Zuckerberg co-created Facebook in his Harvard dorm room.
To accomplish this, Zuckerberg hacked into the protected areas of Harvard's computer network, and copied the houses' private dormitory ID images. Harvard at that time did not have a student "facebook" (a directory with photos and basic information). Facemash attracted 450 visitors and 22,000 photo-views in its first four hours online.
From Wiki, with sources linked on it.
/ And seriously slashdot, still no italics? WTF.
At first I thought the summary said "Lovely-Feces.com" and I got nervous wondering if I remembered to lock down my Poo Pix Daily Journal. I don't think you wanna scrape that.
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
The quarter-million fake accounts here can reply to the presumably equal number of fakes on match.com. Pardon me while I go register DNS names for virtual wedding sites; they're sure to be a hit!
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
One step at a time here. I am working on the basement part.
The world is how you make it
Assuming they're members of FB in the first place -- since the profiles are publicly available.
Sites like this are going to keep coming, here is another that is doing close to the same thing. http:\\secureyourfacebook.com
I'm going to go rob your house. But don't worry, it's just a prank to teach you about alarm systems.
If Commander Taco was really Sarah Palin, I'd date her, except she's married.
Let's go over your fantasy:
(a) Commander Taco is really Sarah Palin. <-- Check!
(b) Taco/Palin would date you. <-- Check!
(c) You would date a married woman. <-- No Way!
That's an interesting place to inject reality...
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9OtAvuobLwgJ:www.okcupid.com/z/yf2
This article was originally posted on Hackers News, but its a great story
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
It's not a commercial site though. They don't collect any money, so not even a not-for-profit.
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but why exactly is this unethical? The data is publicly available and TFA's screenshot (the real site is apparently /.'d) only says "[Lovely Faces] lists real people, sincerely positing their real data and picture" which is not a lie (modulo marketing exaggeration that everyone seems to be happy glossing over) as these people posted their data to Facebook. Suppose for a moment there was no implication whatsoever that the people listed on Lovely Faces intentionally signed up. In that case, what's wrong with collecting publicly available data and putting it into one site? Is the issue entirely that people expect dating site profiles to have been created by that person, and Lovely Faces doesn't smash that expectation?
Scraping data violates Facebook's Automated Data Collection Terms, though in what way are those binding? I don't have to explicitly agree to anything to view some information, like certain profile's pictures.
I agree it is unethical to take someone's picture, point at it, and say "this person endorses this site" when they actually don't. It doesn't seem unethical to take someone's picture and put it on "the online database of pictures of people". Most people seem to be saying the scraping itself was unethical, while I disagree. I think it's just the implied endorsement.
...such as "This is being used as satire" -- protected speech, use of IP, and all that.
Now, people in countries that have stricter personal information laws than the US might be able to sue both organizations (FB for leaking PII and these other guys for publishing without notification).
But Facebook doesn't own the copyrights of the photo.
It's definitively a copyright violation, but Facebook can't sue for that, only the copyright owner (the photographer, usually, unless it's a work for hire).
Dilbert RSS feed
I don't think any legal systems currently support recursion. Maybe in an update or two.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
I have my cat's pick on my facebook pic, now i'm going to get a ton of furry peeps wanting dates.
Guess I better get Second Life up and running.
Be seeing you...