Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Glitch Lets You Search For Pictures of Your Female Friends, But Not Your Male Ones (thenextweb.com)

Belgian security researcher Inti De Ceukelaire has found an unusual glitch in Facebook's search function. Facebook lets you search for photos of your female friends, but refuses to let you look up pictures of your male friends. The Next Web has managed to replicate the glitch across several Facebook accounts. "When you type 'photos of my female friends' into the search bar, Facebook will return a seemingly-random selection of photos from your female friends," reports TNW. From the report: Switching out "female" with "male" returns something completely different. Instead of pictures of friends from within your social network, you're instead shown a selection of pictures from across the social network. In our experience, these came from accounts and groups we did not follow. Facebook will also ask if you meant to type "female," assuming you mistyped your query.

If you're feeling an overwhelming sense of deja vu, you're not alone. The predecessor to Facebook was a deeply unsavory site called Facemash that allowed Harvard University students to rate their female colleagues based on perceived physical attractiveness. It's a far cry from the now-hugely popular social network site, used by millennials and grandparents alike. Facebook has desperately tried to shed this deeply questionable part of its history for something more saccharine and innocuous. [...] The main difference though is that this is almost certainly an innocent mistake, rather than the product of dorm-room shenanigans.

34 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, sure... by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

    But can it sort them by boob size?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Yeah, sure... by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      You know how the saying goes. Once you've seen on set of boobs... You want to see them all...

    2. Re: Yeah, sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is why zuck built Facebook in the first place...

  2. "Glitch" by ewhac · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, right. "Glitch..."

    1. Re:"Glitch" by dryriver · · Score: 1

      Relax. Zuckerberg has humanity's best interests in mind, always. If he says its a "Glitch" then it must be - well - a "Glitch". (Goes to Facebook and types "show me pictures of every Glitch I am friends with" into the search field)

      --
      Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    2. Re:"Glitch" by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, right. "Glitch..."

      Well, it is a glitch. Only Zuckerberg is supposed to have access to that functionality.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. Great for finding transsexuals by Dirk+Becher · · Score: 1

    If that had been present before my marriage. And my second to last marriage.

  4. Seems their AI knows us better than I though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > Facebook will also ask if you meant to type "female,"
    I was underestimating this whole AI craze, but turns out it's pretty legit.

  5. Strange by bobstreo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Other than work acquaintances about 90% of the people I have in my "friends" list are female.

    For the statistically inclined, of the 89% about 70% are either females I have or females I would have sex with.

    The rest are relatives of some kind or other. which are not included in the previous paragraph, well except your mom. /s

    1. Re:Strange by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      For the statistically inclined, of the 89% about 70% are either females I have or females I would have sex with.

      For the pedantically inclined, you didn't specify the split of that 70%. For some reason for anyone talking about their sex life on slashdot, I'm inclined to think is skews all one way.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  6. Seriously? by mark-t · · Score: 1, Interesting

    While I can understand wanting to look for photos of friends, what possible reason could someone have for only wanting to see pics of their male friends or female friends? If they have someone in mind, they can search for pictures of that person.

    But I can think of precisely zero cases where I would want to discriminate which photos I wanted to see of my friends based on their gender.

    So am I out to lunch here? Can someone explain why this should actually even be a thing?

    1. Re:Seriously? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Stupid people seek to gain social status by comparing and rating the looks of their female friends. Broke dirtbags collect and trade pictures of other people's female friends as though they were baseball cards. Pictures of guys just aren't that popular, though I suspect the search logic would know what you meant if you searched for "penis" instead.

    2. Re:Seriously? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      While I can understand wanting to look for photos of friends, what possible reason could someone have for only wanting to see pics of their male friends or female friends?

      Facebook: a boon for the lazy stalker with ADHD.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Seriously? by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      So am I out to lunch here? Can someone explain why this should actually even be a thing?

      Seriously, you need someone to explain "the birds and the bees" to you?

    4. Re:Seriously? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      And on that subject, I wouldn't have figured a person to be so without as to not know who a friend is that they had some sort of romantic interest in that they couldn't simply search for photos directly on the person's name. I'm underwhelmed.

    5. Re:Seriously? by RedK · · Score: 1

      What does romantic have to do with it ? And why limit to a single friend of the female gender ?

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    6. Re:Seriously? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      What does romantic have to do with it

      Well, he did mention the "birds and the bees"... call me old fashioned, but I'd generally think that a person is going to have at least some amount of romantic (as opposed to platonic) attraction to whoever they decide to mate with.

      And why limit to a single friend of the female gender ?

      My bad. Monogomy is the social norm for human beings, so I may have overgeneralized.

    7. Re:Seriously? by RedK · · Score: 1

      Are you a prude in real life or do you just pretend to gaslight people on Slashdot ?

      Guys want to stare at boobs. Guys search female friend pictures to scope out their boobs. Doesn't have anything romantic, doesn't have anything to do with long term commitment.

      It's no different than going to Pornhub. Or do you also stick to only a single porn star for "monogomous" reasons ?

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    8. Re:Seriously? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Uh, sure.... except they were talking about Facebook, not a singles or dating site, hookup site, or porn site... and, in particular, people searching their own *friends*, not strangers' pics.

      Maybe I am a prude, but I seriously had no idea that using Facebook in this way was actually a real life thing until seeing this. In retrospect, I know I shouldn't have been all that surprised, but that didn't mean it was something that I'd have actually ever imagined real people doing.

  7. Bug or Feature by Paxtez · · Score: 1

    You say "bug", I say "feature".

  8. at 15, every codebase w/ glitch it deserves by epine · · Score: 1

    At 50, everyone has the face he deserves.

    Now to update that for the 21st century:

    At 15, everyone proprietary codebase is poxed by the glitches of karma.

    I'm not exactly filing this glitch under "accidental".

  9. This is not a glitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This an artifact of some mouth-breathing troll brogrammer's passive aggressive sexual assault plans.

  10. There is different functionality here by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Informative

    I just spent some time testing this. I see two things going on. One is that the frequent search terms are definitely biased towards searching for female photos. This may be legit and simply represents what people search for most.
    Here are the search suggestions when I type "photos of my":
    photos of my female friends
    photos of my friends
    photos of my female friends in bikinis
    photos of my boyfriend
    photos of my girlfriend
    photos of my female friends this month
    photos of my friends from this month
    photos of my wife

    There is, however, most certainly an actual difference in the functionality between searching for "photos of my female friends" and "photos of my male friends". When I search for the female friends, I see a search result box titled in bold text "Photos of my female friends" and it does indeed contain pictures of my female friends. Beneath this box is another result box titled just "Photos" with random posted photos (4 of the 6 are of females, but not from my friends).

    Now, when I search for "photos of my male friends" it does not have a results box that says "Photos of my male friends" at all, and instead only has the generic "Photos" box with photos from random posts (and two have men in them along with females, and one is only of a female - however none is of just a male).

    So there is definitely a difference in actual functionality here, at least from my account as a male. It was implemented to function in this way.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:There is different functionality here by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      That is the implication in the article.

      The predecessor to Facebook allowed you to rate your female friends.

      I would assume they had some functionality built in to get the list of female friends... that would make it easy to rate.

      Somehow this functionality was kept in facebook including the search strings.

      Probably an honest mistake, but also surprising it wasn't taken out or have the male version added as time went on.

    2. Re: There is different functionality here by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      I have to ask....who would search for "pictures of my wife"?

      Edit: I guess a lot of people? There are certainly a lot of results.

      --
      -Styopa
  11. what possible reason by epine · · Score: 2

    what possible reason

    Possible reasons to do things are more common than jelly beans under sofa cushions. Dislodge the sofa cushion of your imagination, then stoutly hold forth your outstretched apron skirt to receive a giant payload.

    Here's a starting point: people add search terms to narrow the field of search when seeking something you dimly recall, but where the precise contents (such as personal names) have slipped from mind.

    If you're trying to recall the design of some cute top, "female friends and gay friends with flamboyant, effeminate style" is your winning ticket. But we're still five years away from machine learning being able to navigate "gay friends with flamboyant, effeminate style" so for now you leave that portion out.

    1. Re:what possible reason by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Okay.... I guess. But when I am trying to recall someone I've met, the first thing that I might try and use to figure out who it was is where I had seen that person or when, not what sex they are. The idea of cataloguing someone's sex as an attribute that you'd even bother to use for search criteria for someone you know seems weird to me... about on par with cataloguing which of my friends are left handed vs right handed, for example... and I had to seriously think for a while to come up with that comparison. Honestly, I would have had no idea it was a thing if I hadn't seen this story.

  12. string matching substring by spatley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    'male' is a substring of 'female' any search for the string 'female' would not match 'male' but a search for the string 'male' would match 'female'

    It couldn't be that simple could it?

    1. Re:string matching substring by blackpaw · · Score: 1

      Good point

    2. Re:string matching substring by Kejiro · · Score: 1
      That was my thought as well, but not likely.

      The gender is most probably not stored as a text string in their database, and even if it were, the search would need to know to look in the gender field in order to match it.

      They could store the gender as a tag on each image, together with other tags, but even then they would need to populate the tags with the gender implicitly from the data. Add to that that a substring search requires more processing than a word search (depending on the database and index functionality) it makes no sense to perform such a search when a complete word is enough. Of course, they could match the tags against known words and split them beforehand so female becomes fe- male, but probably not ;)

      I suspect it is as was mentioned in another thread. The glitch is that it became available to not only a select few.
      Btw, anyone tried if the glitch works in another language? If it works when searching in another language, then it's most probably not a substring search.

    3. Re:string matching substring by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It would also match tamales and malediction.

      There are ways round that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:string matching substring by mlush · · Score: 1

      If it was spotting the substring, male would being up both sexes. In my hands male brings up no photos.

    5. Re:string matching substring by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      /sarcasm I propose we use a different word for female say "fale". Oh wait, that doesn't have a good connotation. =P

      What happens when searching for drinking buddies aka "ale" ? Will it match male AND female?

      If they are doing substring matching then the algorithm is an epic fail.
      i.e.
      In the early days of UO you couldn't type "assassin" because the profanity filter would find "ass". God help you if you wanted to use "compassion". LOL. There are a ton of valid words with ass in them.

      This isn't rocket science -- just basic computer science.

  13. Possible unintend consequence by Cipheron · · Score: 1

    You know, it's actually far more likely that this would have arisen if you'd restricted people from searching for pictures of females *who were not their friends* but didn't make the same restriction for males.

    This could in fact be a feature intended to prevent harassment / stalking of women who haven't accepted you as a friend.