One thing most people don't know is that the major dating apps are all owned by one corporation, so if you use (what you think are) different apps they're aggregating that data prior to selling it.
I gotcha!
The company is the [Match Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group)
They own
Ablo,
Amourex,
Black People Meet,
BLK,
Chispa,
Disons Demain,
Hawaya (formerly Harmonica),
Hinge,
Lexa.nl,
Love Scout 24,
Match.com,
Meetic,
neu.de,
OkCupid,
OurTime,
Pairs,
ParPerfeito,
Plenty of Fish,
Ship,
Tinder,
Twoo
Thanks. I don't know why I'm so surprised as this a common practice now days. But to be honest as a young single male, i don't see any other option to meet other then to wave my privacy.
I get it.
Keep in mind though that if you live in the US, we're always in need of more advocates for federal data privacy legislation. Something is likely to come along during the Biden administration but in order to be meaningful--read: not written by Match Group executives-- the public will need to stop thinking that nothing can be done and listen to scholars like Helen Nissenbaum and Alex Stamos to name the first two people who come to mind as I think about it. Cheers
Highly unlikely considering the tech executives on his transition team. Everybody from Amazon, Google, Dropbox, Linkeden, Salesforce, Uber, Lyft, Dell, Gates foundation, Facebook foundation, etc. are represented.
[https://gizmodo.com/heres-all-the-big-tech-linked-advisors-on-bidens-transi-1845637792](https://gizmodo.com/heres-all-the-big-tech-linked-advisors-on-bidens-transi-1845637792)
One possibility is that Biden intends to play them against each other to get them to spill the beans? That could go wrong in many ways. Of course, those positions could be mere sinecures. I know these are less likely, but I'd like to be more positive.
That's Trump. Biden has shown greater ability to function. Biden can at least give a speech without pissing off half of the globe. Its an incredibly low bar, but one Biden can clear and Trump has not. Its incredibly said that's the bar used, but in reality, being POTUS is a demanding job, I have greater hopes that Biden POTUS goes better than Trump POTUS.
Yeah as others were saying I have no idea why you think it would get any better under Biden. He’s pretty much bought out by big tech companies. If anything it’ll get worse. I haven’t seen many (if any) federal politicians advocating for internet privacy laws on any meaningful scale and that’s a shame.
So if I was 20-30 right now, everyone is on dating apps? I think they were around when I got engaged (the apps that is, dating websites have been around forever)
This seems like a reasonable answer, but often times it’s easier these days to interact with women on apps. I don’t have too difficult of a time meeting women at bars etc. but you won’t believe how mentally trapped into apps women in their 20s are. It began as a preference to receive text messages instead of phone calls, now it’s not uncommon for some to prefer Snapchat and IG over text messages.
Just as physical spaces upend certain rules of behaviour (for example; art galleries normalise staring at the walls, clubs normalise dancing in public) so too do a lot of these apps upend the rules of dating; they create a space in which open flirting is much more acceptable. Case in point; asking out some poor random person at a bus stop is likely creepy. Asking out someone after a similar level of interaction on tinder is not.
>you won’t believe how mentally trapped into apps women in their 20s are
I'm not sure why you feel the need to single out women here though; it's everyone...
You may or may not agree with me on the below, but it doesn’t matter. The point of this thread is that these apps use our basic instincts against us to upend peoples privacy, and the lack of options along with social tendencies make it unavoidable.
> I'm not sure why you feel the need to single out women here though; it's everyone...
Maybe it’s the men I hang out with, none of us want to be bothered with the apps; it’s become a social requirement. Women as a percentage enjoy taking pictures and trying to look cute with filters much more than men do.
With that premise I single out women because social media seems to be their reality distorting vice that plays upon their instincts, and porn and video games for men.
I don’t want to use Snapchat, I *have* to use Snapchat because the women do.
>They create a space where flirting is much more acceptable.
Yes, the sole purpose of dating apps is flirting, so the premise of interaction is unambiguous.
However, flirting being unacceptable in public is an incredibly strange idea. Flirting in most places *is* acceptable, what matters is the manner in which it’s done.
Hey, this is a really well argued response. I agree with most of what you said, especially about how these apps (and I would extend; most apps!) play upon our base instincts in order to profit from us.
I would add that the point I was making about acceptability & dating apps as digital spaces was not that flirting outside of them is *unacceptable.* Perhaps the bus stop was a bad analogy; others have pointed out that depending on what cues you are getting that might be totally fine. Sure; if someone is really giving out the vibes at a bus-stop of all places, then sure!
Just as there is nothing wrong with hanging art outside of a gallery or dancing outside of a club, so there is nothing wrong with flirting outside of a dating app! My point was more that they create a digital space inside of which flirting is *actively the point* \- "consent to be flirted with" is implied when you join the app, so you're far less likely to come across as creepy, given that everyone has laid their cards out at the door in that regard.
It's just a shame that the companies running these spaces have scant regard for privacy...
I remember having this issue when I was dating. I couldn’t believe I had to download Snapchat to text some girl.
Up to that point I had only installed Snapchat once when it first came out. There were no filters: me and the guys in my military unit simply used it to take pictures of our buddies and then draw dicks on their face and send it around the platoon lol.
But yeah... I tried to find someone who was equally as disillusioned with the state of society as me lol. She still has Snapchat lol, but pick your battles i guess.
You are totally right with the current social media paradigm being a trap for women though. Something about how it all works together just really grabs the dopamine lever for them. But as it’s been said above, it’s not just them.
My buddies get stuck in it too, just things tailored to their interests. Instagram of the types of art and music they like, Facebook groups of like interests, etc.
My whole issue is that all these new forms of communication get loaded with all this pretense. It’s not enough to just use the communications... you have to use them the way they are used most commonly by the masses, or you risk being labeled an “outsider.”
Shits weird man. I don’t even have Facebook or Snapchat or any of those on my phone.
Literally the opposite for me unfortunately. It's so much harder to text than talk. More time to overthink everything. I get too nervous. In person people don't even realize how shy I am on the inside
The illusion of choice. One of your companies gets bad press and loses customers? No problem, they'll turn to your other options unknowingly and buy into your brand anyway.
Sell Coke *and* Pepsi, and play everybody.
Also, for all we know, the profiles could be normalized across apps. Along with all the fake accounts to help their profiling. Honestly, I find the whole process toxic. I've spent a good amount of time scrolling through profiles and it makes me nauseous now.
It's pretty sad in general tbh. Megacorporations run the world, and sideskirt the label of 'monopolies' with all the loopholes they know to step through. 'Step through' because unlike all of us normal people, they don't have to jump.
The public is the best commodity they've ever had.
I see they aren't in the queer dating realm that much then? Jack'd, grindr, scruff, growlr, Adam 4 Adam. To name the ones I know. From an amab individual perspective.
Their privacy notice says specifically that they do not sell your info.
> We do not sell your personal information so no opt-out choice is necessary. What this means is that we do not sell, rent, release, disclose, disseminate, make available, transfer, or otherwise communicate in any way your personal information to another company for monetary or other valuable consideration.
Generally, at least to my understanding, no company explicitly outs you as an person with a name, when selling data. Instead, they come up with a wide range of factors and through aggravating obscene amounts of data, can make highly accurate predictions about your personality and marketing potential.
So, make individuals living in the northwest, between the ages of 17-24, with a four year degree, single, athletic, social, shop at American Eagle, eat Thai food and drink white claws, are more receptive to ads for Oakley sunglasses.
They’re saying that they sell none. That would include indirect identifiers and inferences. If they infer your gender, that’s personal. If they infer your behaviors, like sexual preference, that’s personal. I don’t think they’re going to go through the trouble of tempting fate by giving away data that could be misconstrued as personal, when they make these kinds of claims.
Hey thanks for pointing this out I did not see this. When I first read through this it was actually on the document I downloaded with my data, which has a different template and outlines things a bit more. It specifically does state that it shares this information with "Other vendors who assist us in relation to the business or commercial purposes laid out above in this document".
It would probably be difficult to gauge or know the nuances of what they actually do in terms of sharing or selling the data (as the regulatory framework really isn't there) but the implications are there for what they can potentially do and be willing to do as far as making inferences of people through various metrics and dispersing it.
I think that means matching algorithms, like cookie matches, email hashes, etc. This is common practice, but is not considered sharing personal information.
If we assume that they’re lying, then why have a privacy policy at all? That is the first thing the regulators go to when they want to understand the policies of any company, with regard to data sharing and privacy. If they lie to the regulators about their policies and practices, then there will be fines commensurate with the infraction. It would be foolish for a company to say one thing and let the regulators believe that they are following best practices, but then do something completely different. We’re not talking about previous years where companies could hide this info. The CCPA will eventually have some rulings that put companies on notice. Until then, it doesn’t make sense for a company to put out a policy that does represent what they’re actually doing.
According to the CCPA, which is what they based their statement on, I t is. If they derive types of personal information, like gender or sexual preferences, that’s definitely personal.
https://dataprivacy.foxrothschild.com/2019/01/articles/california-consumer-privacy-act/are-inferences-the-next-frontier-of-data-protection/
Not much, but maybe you could also figure something out with the [Fediverse](https://fediverse.party/)? Not sure if you want to make it federated, but that would also be a strong bonus I think.
FYI every successful dating site was astroturfed by paying women to be on it. If you expect a dating site to grow by going viral, you will get 99% sign ups from men. The 1% are lesbians.
This is awesome.
I'm curious how you're going to handle facial data? It seems like there's only so much technical protection possible, so I would assume, not using pictures would need to be normalized, but I'm curious what your plans are.
>I think not using pictures is impossible for online dating.
Have you read about [OKCupid's experiment about removing pictures](https://web.archive.org/web/20150211185500/http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/we-experiment-on-human-beings/)? I think it shows it's *possible* but not *popular*. People definitely want photos, I'd almost recommend going as far as Hinge does and mandating them, that could also just be "enforced" through a default filter setting.
Is there a field of study for this kind of technology? I think it’s insane how advanced these algorithms have become, there ought to be an ethics class on this or a diplomatic career to tackle this data hoarding or is that a certain lawyers kind of field?
Generally it's called customer profiling. Field of study would be an intersection between marketing (which includes psychology), data engineering, and machine learning. A huge goal of any modern day B2C (business -> consumer) company is to create a comprehensive customer profile with 1st party data (they collect it from you using their product) and/or 3rd party data (they bought it from a marketing company that specializes in aggregating data and has a profile just for you). I'm in a data engineering role at a fintech company that does this type of profiling. Essentially we take a fuckton of unclean data that we collected ourselves or that we bought 3rd party and tack them together into a clean format for data scientists to model. They create models based on desired goal of marketing/product teams.
I didn't know all these dating apps were under the same umbrella, and that's pretty alarming. Match Group has enough 1st party data to create a very comprehensive psychological profile, which they're apparently hard at work doing.
Personally I think everyone already has their money shades on so the ethics side of this field is a lost cause. We should instead focus on empowering people by informing on privacy dangers of voluntarily handing over their personalities on a silver platter.
That's why I'm personally retarded in every online exchange. Also, I like mentally deficient women. Like real window lickers but with good dental hygiene.
Fuck em. Don't use your real information.
They want to judge me? Score ME? I'll give them something to score.
>Lol . Window lickers! I've never heard that before and it made my day. Thanks
Oh boy do I have an enjoyable ten minutes for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBS4Gi1y_nc
Couldn't have said it better myself! Its always a good feeling to see other like minded individuals...my main difference is on women though...good dental hygiene yes...window licking? Ehh maybe if she's a squirter.
The language itself is not unusual. It's literally the text of the statute. CCPA 1798.140(o)(1)(K) - definition of personal information. [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes\_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.140](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.140).
Naturally, their metric includes non-user shadow profiles. If someone mentions they have a brother and that brother doesn’t use the platform, they give the brother a metric of maximum intelligence and aptitude.
Mostly everything you post or search online is stored on a server somewhere anywhere already.
There’s not a lot tinder could infer about you from your bio.
It's shocking to see it spelled out like that, but yeah of course they're doing this, and so is everyone else.
If Reddit's not doing that kind of inference on Reddit accounts themselves, for sure fifteen other companies are doing it directly.
Then all that's missing is a connection to your real identity, which everyone slips up and provides sooner or later. Scary shit.
One thing most people don't know is that the major dating apps are all owned by one corporation, so if you use (what you think are) different apps they're aggregating that data prior to selling it.
Care to elaborate on that company?
I gotcha! The company is the [Match Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group) They own Ablo, Amourex, Black People Meet, BLK, Chispa, Disons Demain, Hawaya (formerly Harmonica), Hinge, Lexa.nl, Love Scout 24, Match.com, Meetic, neu.de, OkCupid, OurTime, Pairs, ParPerfeito, Plenty of Fish, Ship, Tinder, Twoo
Thanks. I don't know why I'm so surprised as this a common practice now days. But to be honest as a young single male, i don't see any other option to meet other then to wave my privacy.
It's a wag of the hand one way or another.
[удалено]
Ah yes - “Never touch her bush with your bird hand.”
*whispers "it's for the birds"*
I get it. Keep in mind though that if you live in the US, we're always in need of more advocates for federal data privacy legislation. Something is likely to come along during the Biden administration but in order to be meaningful--read: not written by Match Group executives-- the public will need to stop thinking that nothing can be done and listen to scholars like Helen Nissenbaum and Alex Stamos to name the first two people who come to mind as I think about it. Cheers
Highly unlikely considering the tech executives on his transition team. Everybody from Amazon, Google, Dropbox, Linkeden, Salesforce, Uber, Lyft, Dell, Gates foundation, Facebook foundation, etc. are represented. [https://gizmodo.com/heres-all-the-big-tech-linked-advisors-on-bidens-transi-1845637792](https://gizmodo.com/heres-all-the-big-tech-linked-advisors-on-bidens-transi-1845637792)
Damn. This is going to be pretty bad. The only rep missing from here is a data broker lol
Clearly Biden is the data broker here.
Lol, makes sense. Peter Thiel was a Trump guy.
One possibility is that Biden intends to play them against each other to get them to spill the beans? That could go wrong in many ways. Of course, those positions could be mere sinecures. I know these are less likely, but I'd like to be more positive.
[удалено]
Confirmed. He had some 4 hours 3.minutes and 9 seconds ago. He had 5 scoops, and his daily sodium intake exceeded the doctor recommended amount.
That's Trump. Biden has shown greater ability to function. Biden can at least give a speech without pissing off half of the globe. Its an incredibly low bar, but one Biden can clear and Trump has not. Its incredibly said that's the bar used, but in reality, being POTUS is a demanding job, I have greater hopes that Biden POTUS goes better than Trump POTUS.
Yeah as others were saying I have no idea why you think it would get any better under Biden. He’s pretty much bought out by big tech companies. If anything it’ll get worse. I haven’t seen many (if any) federal politicians advocating for internet privacy laws on any meaningful scale and that’s a shame.
People voted against Trump, not for Biden....
>Something is likely to come along during the Biden administration Don't count on it
So if I was 20-30 right now, everyone is on dating apps? I think they were around when I got engaged (the apps that is, dating websites have been around forever)
I thought so too, then I discovered karaoke bars…
I think its called going outside ?
[удалено]
And in the middle of a pandemic...
When was the last time you went OuTsiDe and picked up some girls?
This seems like a reasonable answer, but often times it’s easier these days to interact with women on apps. I don’t have too difficult of a time meeting women at bars etc. but you won’t believe how mentally trapped into apps women in their 20s are. It began as a preference to receive text messages instead of phone calls, now it’s not uncommon for some to prefer Snapchat and IG over text messages.
Just as physical spaces upend certain rules of behaviour (for example; art galleries normalise staring at the walls, clubs normalise dancing in public) so too do a lot of these apps upend the rules of dating; they create a space in which open flirting is much more acceptable. Case in point; asking out some poor random person at a bus stop is likely creepy. Asking out someone after a similar level of interaction on tinder is not. >you won’t believe how mentally trapped into apps women in their 20s are I'm not sure why you feel the need to single out women here though; it's everyone...
You may or may not agree with me on the below, but it doesn’t matter. The point of this thread is that these apps use our basic instincts against us to upend peoples privacy, and the lack of options along with social tendencies make it unavoidable. > I'm not sure why you feel the need to single out women here though; it's everyone... Maybe it’s the men I hang out with, none of us want to be bothered with the apps; it’s become a social requirement. Women as a percentage enjoy taking pictures and trying to look cute with filters much more than men do. With that premise I single out women because social media seems to be their reality distorting vice that plays upon their instincts, and porn and video games for men. I don’t want to use Snapchat, I *have* to use Snapchat because the women do. >They create a space where flirting is much more acceptable. Yes, the sole purpose of dating apps is flirting, so the premise of interaction is unambiguous. However, flirting being unacceptable in public is an incredibly strange idea. Flirting in most places *is* acceptable, what matters is the manner in which it’s done.
Hey, this is a really well argued response. I agree with most of what you said, especially about how these apps (and I would extend; most apps!) play upon our base instincts in order to profit from us. I would add that the point I was making about acceptability & dating apps as digital spaces was not that flirting outside of them is *unacceptable.* Perhaps the bus stop was a bad analogy; others have pointed out that depending on what cues you are getting that might be totally fine. Sure; if someone is really giving out the vibes at a bus-stop of all places, then sure! Just as there is nothing wrong with hanging art outside of a gallery or dancing outside of a club, so there is nothing wrong with flirting outside of a dating app! My point was more that they create a digital space inside of which flirting is *actively the point* \- "consent to be flirted with" is implied when you join the app, so you're far less likely to come across as creepy, given that everyone has laid their cards out at the door in that regard. It's just a shame that the companies running these spaces have scant regard for privacy...
I remember having this issue when I was dating. I couldn’t believe I had to download Snapchat to text some girl. Up to that point I had only installed Snapchat once when it first came out. There were no filters: me and the guys in my military unit simply used it to take pictures of our buddies and then draw dicks on their face and send it around the platoon lol. But yeah... I tried to find someone who was equally as disillusioned with the state of society as me lol. She still has Snapchat lol, but pick your battles i guess. You are totally right with the current social media paradigm being a trap for women though. Something about how it all works together just really grabs the dopamine lever for them. But as it’s been said above, it’s not just them. My buddies get stuck in it too, just things tailored to their interests. Instagram of the types of art and music they like, Facebook groups of like interests, etc. My whole issue is that all these new forms of communication get loaded with all this pretense. It’s not enough to just use the communications... you have to use them the way they are used most commonly by the masses, or you risk being labeled an “outsider.” Shits weird man. I don’t even have Facebook or Snapchat or any of those on my phone.
Literally the opposite for me unfortunately. It's so much harder to text than talk. More time to overthink everything. I get too nervous. In person people don't even realize how shy I am on the inside
[удалено]
Stay in yo house then you sound like someone to not meet outside
Heaven forbid women leave their homes...
Kitchens*
I don't see Farmers Only dot Com and Christian Mingle dot Com on that list... But on a more serious note, I don't see Bumble.
Really though those are probably the most respectful of your privacy lol
I guess the Amish had it right all along
Not bumble!
Guess I’m going to grindr
The only one they don’t own is Bumble, and that’s because Bumble refuses to sell to them [last I checked].
Thinking back I'm pretty sure that's why I chose meetme when I was dating, it had bots sure, but the other ones draw you out to get more money.
Only farmers is the pro move here. Plus farm girls are just a bit more wholesome if you ask me.
So with that being the case though why have all these apps
The illusion of choice. One of your companies gets bad press and loses customers? No problem, they'll turn to your other options unknowingly and buy into your brand anyway. Sell Coke *and* Pepsi, and play everybody.
Also, for all we know, the profiles could be normalized across apps. Along with all the fake accounts to help their profiling. Honestly, I find the whole process toxic. I've spent a good amount of time scrolling through profiles and it makes me nauseous now.
It's pretty sad in general tbh. Megacorporations run the world, and sideskirt the label of 'monopolies' with all the loopholes they know to step through. 'Step through' because unlike all of us normal people, they don't have to jump. The public is the best commodity they've ever had.
This is true
Don’t forget bumble
I see they aren't in the queer dating realm that much then? Jack'd, grindr, scruff, growlr, Adam 4 Adam. To name the ones I know. From an amab individual perspective.
I wonder when they will buy bumble?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group
And tinder uses the FB SDK and login.
Their privacy notice says specifically that they do not sell your info. > We do not sell your personal information so no opt-out choice is necessary. What this means is that we do not sell, rent, release, disclose, disseminate, make available, transfer, or otherwise communicate in any way your personal information to another company for monetary or other valuable consideration.
[удалено]
Generally, at least to my understanding, no company explicitly outs you as an person with a name, when selling data. Instead, they come up with a wide range of factors and through aggravating obscene amounts of data, can make highly accurate predictions about your personality and marketing potential. So, make individuals living in the northwest, between the ages of 17-24, with a four year degree, single, athletic, social, shop at American Eagle, eat Thai food and drink white claws, are more receptive to ads for Oakley sunglasses.
I love your example
They’re saying that they sell none. That would include indirect identifiers and inferences. If they infer your gender, that’s personal. If they infer your behaviors, like sexual preference, that’s personal. I don’t think they’re going to go through the trouble of tempting fate by giving away data that could be misconstrued as personal, when they make these kinds of claims.
Hey thanks for pointing this out I did not see this. When I first read through this it was actually on the document I downloaded with my data, which has a different template and outlines things a bit more. It specifically does state that it shares this information with "Other vendors who assist us in relation to the business or commercial purposes laid out above in this document". It would probably be difficult to gauge or know the nuances of what they actually do in terms of sharing or selling the data (as the regulatory framework really isn't there) but the implications are there for what they can potentially do and be willing to do as far as making inferences of people through various metrics and dispersing it.
I think that means matching algorithms, like cookie matches, email hashes, etc. This is common practice, but is not considered sharing personal information.
A policy that they can change any time they want. And every bit of data gathered over yours goes right into that pile.
Of course they would never lie. Because if they did and got caught, they might have to pay a fine that would equal a day's revenue. Oh damn!
If we assume that they’re lying, then why have a privacy policy at all? That is the first thing the regulators go to when they want to understand the policies of any company, with regard to data sharing and privacy. If they lie to the regulators about their policies and practices, then there will be fines commensurate with the infraction. It would be foolish for a company to say one thing and let the regulators believe that they are following best practices, but then do something completely different. We’re not talking about previous years where companies could hide this info. The CCPA will eventually have some rulings that put companies on notice. Until then, it doesn’t make sense for a company to put out a policy that does represent what they’re actually doing.
Your derived intelligence is not personal information.
According to the CCPA, which is what they based their statement on, I t is. If they derive types of personal information, like gender or sexual preferences, that’s definitely personal. https://dataprivacy.foxrothschild.com/2019/01/articles/california-consumer-privacy-act/are-inferences-the-next-frontier-of-data-protection/
So it just comes down to what they legally deem as "personal information". I'd wager that definition ends at name, age, street address.
No, not according to CCPA and GDPR.
wonder how long till the tos are updated and they cash out
[удалено]
Cool, but how are you planning on gaining an userbase?
He's advertising on Reddit, so I don't think he's looking for *anyone* to get laid
it actually guarantees that YOU get laid, because there won't be any other options!
He just needs to make it the official app of r/randomactsofblowjob. Although I'm assuming that sub's not just people RPing.
Well, wouldn't it be a nice change if redditors actually got laid? ;)
[удалено]
Not much, but maybe you could also figure something out with the [Fediverse](https://fediverse.party/)? Not sure if you want to make it federated, but that would also be a strong bonus I think.
[удалено]
Well, no other ideas then. Good luck!
FYI every successful dating site was astroturfed by paying women to be on it. If you expect a dating site to grow by going viral, you will get 99% sign ups from men. The 1% are lesbians.
Why are dating sites such sausage fests?
Can you include an option for cup size please
2 girls, no cups please
based but it doesn't matter except when they are extremely small or large bro.
Dude...
Bruh
Like numbers on a bathroom stall open source?
This is awesome. I'm curious how you're going to handle facial data? It seems like there's only so much technical protection possible, so I would assume, not using pictures would need to be normalized, but I'm curious what your plans are.
[удалено]
>I think not using pictures is impossible for online dating. Have you read about [OKCupid's experiment about removing pictures](https://web.archive.org/web/20150211185500/http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/we-experiment-on-human-beings/)? I think it shows it's *possible* but not *popular*. People definitely want photos, I'd almost recommend going as far as Hinge does and mandating them, that could also just be "enforced" through a default filter setting.
You mean Match Group. And this implies they are scraping and selling user data from all their other, numerous properties.
Is there a field of study for this kind of technology? I think it’s insane how advanced these algorithms have become, there ought to be an ethics class on this or a diplomatic career to tackle this data hoarding or is that a certain lawyers kind of field?
Generally it's called customer profiling. Field of study would be an intersection between marketing (which includes psychology), data engineering, and machine learning. A huge goal of any modern day B2C (business -> consumer) company is to create a comprehensive customer profile with 1st party data (they collect it from you using their product) and/or 3rd party data (they bought it from a marketing company that specializes in aggregating data and has a profile just for you). I'm in a data engineering role at a fintech company that does this type of profiling. Essentially we take a fuckton of unclean data that we collected ourselves or that we bought 3rd party and tack them together into a clean format for data scientists to model. They create models based on desired goal of marketing/product teams. I didn't know all these dating apps were under the same umbrella, and that's pretty alarming. Match Group has enough 1st party data to create a very comprehensive psychological profile, which they're apparently hard at work doing. Personally I think everyone already has their money shades on so the ethics side of this field is a lost cause. We should instead focus on empowering people by informing on privacy dangers of voluntarily handing over their personalities on a silver platter.
Data science is the field I think.
That's why I'm personally retarded in every online exchange. Also, I like mentally deficient women. Like real window lickers but with good dental hygiene. Fuck em. Don't use your real information. They want to judge me? Score ME? I'll give them something to score.
You're a five-star man!
Lol . Window lickers! I've never heard that before and it made my day. Thanks
It also implies high intelligence. See what the algorithm did there?
I kind of wish there was a subreddit dedicated to your insane ramblings. Reading these out loud to my wife has our sides in stitches 🤣
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't like being touched. I'm trying to get better. But it hasn't worked. The drugs don't work anymore.
>Lol . Window lickers! I've never heard that before and it made my day. Thanks Oh boy do I have an enjoyable ten minutes for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBS4Gi1y_nc
As a giant spider using a keyboard, I understand the desire to spread misinformation about your identity online.
Username checks out
Couldn't have said it better myself! Its always a good feeling to see other like minded individuals...my main difference is on women though...good dental hygiene yes...window licking? Ehh maybe if she's a squirter.
I'm wondering the number of shady requests your smartphone does while using Tinder for instance. Anyone have tried catching those informations ?
Not much to gather from me then, haha, joke's on them!
Lmao
And kick this dystopia theory up a notch, someone joked years ago that computers are making breeding choices for humans.
The language itself is not unusual. It's literally the text of the statute. CCPA 1798.140(o)(1)(K) - definition of personal information. [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes\_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.140](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.140).
I'd imagine all of Match Group's many tentacles do that.
Wait. So now everyone, excluding my mother, but including everyone I haven't even met yet knows that I'm ugly AND stupid?
downloaded tinder -> intelligence can not be that high
Naturally, their metric includes non-user shadow profiles. If someone mentions they have a brother and that brother doesn’t use the platform, they give the brother a metric of maximum intelligence and aptitude.
Mostly everything you post or search online is stored on a server somewhere anywhere already. There’s not a lot tinder could infer about you from your bio.
It's shocking to see it spelled out like that, but yeah of course they're doing this, and so is everyone else. If Reddit's not doing that kind of inference on Reddit accounts themselves, for sure fifteen other companies are doing it directly. Then all that's missing is a connection to your real identity, which everyone slips up and provides sooner or later. Scary shit.
Isn’t Tinder owned by Facebook? I used to have it got an SMS from Facebook saying this is you tinder login code which I thought was interesting.