Googling For Dates? 447
JAK writes "The New York Times' down-to-earth ethicist Randy Cohen writes on the moral implications of searching for a date's past on Google. He suggests that the practice is ok (even admitting to doing it himself) but warns against jumping to conclusions based on a quick search or confusing someone for others with the same name. He also writes that "the verb ''to Google'' is now a familiar neologism" (neologism: a new word, usage, or expression, I looked it up).
You can read about it The Times (free reg blah blah)"
Grr (Score:5, Funny)
This could threaten the whole concept of this "internet" fad forever! =)
Re:Grr (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Grr (Score:5, Funny)
An actress??
Has political correctness gone so far that we can no longer use the correct terms, "carny" or "carnival freak"?
Re:Grr (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Grr (Score:3, Funny)
And then did you eat her liver liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti?
Re:Grr (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thanks, Mr Hemos (Score:5, Funny)
googling (Score:5, Funny)
Re:googling (Score:3, Funny)
Re:googling (Score:3, Funny)
Re:googling (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, that wouldn't be a bad idea: a Google-based dating service. A match-making algorith can't be that different to a search algorithm, could it?
Re:googling (Score:4, Funny)
Re:googling (Score:5, Funny)
Am I the only one who interpreted "Googling for a date" to mean "Use google to find a date"?
Maybe. I interpreted it as typing something like "September 23" into Google to see what happened on that date in the past. Fucked if I could figure out how that could possibly be unethical. Then I read the article and figured out that I'd gotten confused by the USian slang..
Re:googling (Score:3, Interesting)
Although it could be that I'm just unfamiliar with the whole "dating" thing altogether, I hear it involves someone of the opposite sex or something? :)
(And if you don't wanna follow the links, NPR = National Public Radio, a fairly liberal radio network that is mostly funded by donations from listeners. Wait Wait -- Don't Tell Me! is a "news quiz show" that usually focuses on the weirder and more obscure news items - it's rather humorous, generally.)
Re:googling (Score:4, Funny)
CH3 CH2 OH
Are you sure that's a good idea? (Score:5, Funny)
We pause here to note that Google's ranking algorithm is popularity based. You're looking for the girl that has been "linked" the most. Jesus, dude, why not just read the bathroom walls?
</aghast>
Re:googling (Score:3, Funny)
Of course it would be difficult if all you looked up was p0rn.
On the other hand, if anyone can find a girl who divides her day between fps's and a.b.p.e.*, google can.
Not only useful for dating... (Score:5, Insightful)
But then again, whether for dating purposes, or otherwise, why would I put up a page saying something that I may regret later? I am aware that search engines will pick up these pages. I suppose I would be a bit worried if something was out there against me that I had no full control over.
Re:Not only useful for dating... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not only useful for dating... (Score:5, Interesting)
I imagine that this sort of thing will evolve into something a bit more formal, a Personal Information Agency (PIA) located offshore that maintains a database of everyone.
Companies could let them setup cameras in stores in return for having them do targeted marketing. Image recognition could be setup to determine who your friends are (who you are seen with on more than one occasion) and more!
Or not.
Re:Not only useful for dating... (Score:4, Funny)
I have too. Funniest one was a guy who had posted in some kind of student self-help forum, basically his advice was "have a wank; I do it all the time".
I must pop onto google groups and ask them to remove all my semi-humorous usenet posts from their archive, and only leave the saintly helping-out-users posts. It can only help.
I'm lucky to have a pretty common name (sorta equivalent to "John Smith" where I come from), but this goes both ways - posts might be attributed to me when they're not mine, or they might be attributed to others when they are.
I've said so much stuff I regret. . . (Score:5, Interesting)
As my sweet, little old granny used to say, "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."
If things I've written are going to deny me a particular date/job as far as I'm concerned better finding out now than later. It saves us all a lot of unneeded pain and suffering in the long run.
I'm dead serious and I'm not about to go about my life worrying about what some future unnamed and unknowable personage is going to think about me because of something I believed or said once upon a time.
Like me or dislike me. I don't really care in particular. *Someone* likes me. I'll go hang out with them.
Hell, there are even people who like RMS. Go figure.
KFG
Re:Yeah, well, hot chicks dig guys who don't . . . (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, you misunderstood, I meant any exceptionally hot chicks, not one i specific. And I am always sincere, whether I mean it or not.
Consider what you write, and not just on the web (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't just consider web pages, but if you post news non-anonymously (or to /. non-anonymouly) it isn't just the carefully considered rant that is archived forever more, but every ill-considered flamage as well. Having posted to news from well before "dejanews", I was a bit surprised, and not entirely pleased that my posting history back to 1996 is available.
On the otherhand, I do choose to post non-anoymously. While that has some problems, it does mean that not only do I consider what I might regret later, anybody reading my posts can expect that I consider what I might regret later. That might add a smidgen of credibility (which of course can be squandered easily).
Re:Not only useful for dating... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not Very Useful At All (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, I just did a google search for my own name, and could not find my website or, for that matter, anything else affiliated with me in the top 50 links. However, I did find a lawyer, a statistician, a food expert, a college professor, a witness testimony, a sex offender, and an author with the same name as myself. If my date is googling for me, is she supposed to think I'm the professor or the sex offender?
The chances of getting incorrect information makes googling seem far too risky in my opinion. Has anyone else had better luck finding accurate information?
Google -- NYTimes -- Google (Score:5, Informative)
Is Googling OK? [nytimes.com]
*snicker* (Score:3, Funny)
Sometimes it's a good idea. (Score:4, Insightful)
You never know when something as innocuous as a screen name [google.com] can reveal some interesting facts about people.
Sometimes the people you associate with may even have entire second lives or hidden secrets online. Background checking people is a smart and healthy thing to do, in my opinion.
A specific example.. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's just a general principle of being wary, both of walking blindly into relationships and blindly following the words of others. Google simply provides a new path to doing background research on people.
This is why I look at lots of porn (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This is why I look at lots of porn (Score:4, Funny)
One time a tracked a girl down... (Score:2, Funny)
Limiting to only Google!? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Limiting to only Google!? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Limiting to only Google!? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Limiting to only Google!? (Score:5, Funny)
So um, you couldn't get a girl who's obviously looking for sex (why else would she post naked pics on online dating sites?) to sleep with you, unless you blackmailed her? That's pretty sad, dude.
Re:Limiting to only Google!? (Score:3, Funny)
Naked pics, eh? (Score:5, Funny)
Er.
I sincerely hope (Score:2, Funny)
Buffy earlier this season... (Score:5, Funny)
Xander: "Willow, she's only 17!"
And here's a Google cartoon [cartoonbank.com] from the New Yorker.
Google-ing for dates is like........ (Score:2, Offtopic)
All small sources of info, but not worth a damn when it comes to a person!
Googlewhacking? (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
Good thing I have a common first and last name, there's at three people in my urban area with the same name and one famous author, too.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
My personal litmus test: When you start to spend money.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:4, Interesting)
In a word, never.
Even though the term "stalking" has been over used into near meaninglessness, using research tools *never* becomes "stalking" as in physically following someone around.
I'll answer that (Score:3, Informative)
Most anti-stalking statues have a clause or two about putting the "stalkee" in fear, emotional distress, or causing intimidation. You typically also have to show a pattern of such behavior... a single incident does not a stalker make.
Think about all the drooling britney spears fanboys out there (like 95% of slashdotters... cmon, it's cool to hate her music, but ALL of you geeks secretly want her body... admit it). They are not guilty of stalking simply because they plaster their room with pictures, and constantly google the 'net for new britney sites.
Stalking implies much more than just a google search.
Good for bad. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not? Lots of people google for employees (Score:3, Interesting)
A lot of folks I know use Google to check out resumes and otherwise see what sort of projects a job candidate has been up to. People used to use DejaNews (back before it was "Google Groups") to do the same thing.
I'll not comment on whether I consider this ethical or not, but it makes a certain practical sense. But it makes a bit less sense for a date, however, given that the person's online persona may be under a different name, or may be partly or wholly an invention. Still, if I'm dating a (presumed) professional who is likely to have formal or informal writings that may be on the web, it would make sense to "check." I'd personally feel icky doing so, but others wouldn't have qualms...
Does this seem bass-ackward to anyone else? (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, is it going to become necessary for women to get preemptive restraining orders against guys they haven't dated yet, to keep from being stalked on line "as a precautionary measure?" And on the gripping hand, how can we condemn the Feds for doing this kind of thing wholesale, when we aren't above doing it on a piecemeal basis, with no oversight or regulatory structure to govern our actions?
Just a thought or two...
Re:Does this seem bass-ackward to anyone else? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, this "stalking" word/concept has taken on a wild life of it's own. Back in my day, "to stalk" actually required followning the prey in person!
Do people, now, seriously use this term to mean a thought crime of some sort? Does going to the library to lookup someone's past print work count in this new thought crime of "stalking"? "Your Honor, we have his library records, he was looking up English papers at my old college..."
Do the people that keep expanding this term, both in common language as well as in the law, think Orwell's fiction is some sort blueprint of a perfect society?
Not a good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
there was a warrent out for his arrest, long story short, the cop didn't believe that i wasn't him. fun night.
anyway, if someone was to look me up on google, they would find a sexual predator? great. gotta love free information.
i'm all for megan's law
Re:Not a good idea (Score:4, Funny)
Say it aint so!
And you sir, are a prime example of. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
I rather suspect that you weren't exactly treated in a real 'innocent until proven guilty' manner either. As you say, "fun night."
*All* laws that seek to 'preempt' crime create a class of innocent vitims. Some of them have their lives ruined beyond repair. Be greatful it was only your night that was 'fun.'
I'd go so far as to state that preemptive laws create many, many more innocent 'victims' of law than they save actual vitims of crime.
Have you read the so called "Patriot" Act? Hell, from now on it doesn't even necessarily *matter* if you're innocent or guilty.
KFG
Re:And you sir, are a prime example of. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
The latter. Every time. Regardless of the crime. When you're sitting on death row praying for some DNA evidence to show up that clears you, you might understand. Think about if you were publicly targeted as a child molester (say, front page newspaper photo). You'd never work again. You'd never get a date again. Your neighbours would fear you, harrass you, and generally make your life miserable. What if you didn't do it?
If a convicted child molester moves into my neighborhood - I WANT TO KNOW.
Why? Will you watch your children more closely? Will you move away? Where would you go? Would you force said molester to move away? To where? What would you do differently in your safe little neighbourhood that may already have someone like that in it? Why do you have to wait for a known threat to make sure your children are safe?
Re:Not a good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
But who gets to decide whether or not that person poses "enough" of a danger. Presumably the justice system in your country decided to let him go. That may not have been the right decision, but who should decide if not the courts?
Now, given that this guy isn't living in prison, he has to live and work somewhere. If he becomes an outcast unable to rent an apartment and unable to find work, what chance does he have of becoming a productive member of society? You're forcing him to steal to survive.
Ever read/see Les Miserables?
How about a relationship built on trust? (Score:5, Insightful)
You: "Honey, I was just on google. Says on there that you once did (insert stupid mistake or whatever).
SO:"Oh really? So, how long have you been checking up on me?"
You: "Oh, I just wanted to see..."
SO: "Well, how about you see the door as it hits your butt on the way out?"
Google icon (Score:4, Insightful)
The Beginning Of The End (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot editor looks up word in dictionary.
Film at 11.
Ok? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does that mean its like maybe sort of alright?
Also, I would recommend against it. Finding out things about your girlfriend that she din't want to tell you is liek opening up old wounds. Somethings are best left in the past. It also indicates a lack of trust in a relationship taht you feel you have to go behind the other persons back.
Then there is the age old porno problem: You will start thinking about your girlfriend differently after you see her amateur nude photos on the web. It's like discovering your girlfriend posed for playboy: the moment she finds out you know, your relationship will fall apart.
Re:Ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
As long as the people doing the searching aren't idiots, there is nothing wrong with this practice. If they are idiots, well, they're idiots.
Re:Ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
AltaVista almost freaked my wife out when we met (Score:5, Interesting)
We met, hit it off, started dating, and five years later (this last Labor Day), got married.
Some dates after we met, she told me that she looked me up on AltaVista after she'd met me, and found 40,000 matches. (I was moderating the Internet Marketing Discussion List, www.i-m.com, and my name appeared on every post in the archives, which themselves appeared to be at many different domains.)
She said, if I'd looked you up beforehand I never would have called you. She would have been intimidated.
Thank goodness for a little lack of knowledge.
Weighting the odds... (Score:5, Funny)
Each site'll have a whole bunch of meta tags, something like:
BENEVOLENT, NATHDOT, KIND, LIKES LONG WALKS ALONG BEACHES, NATHDOT, NATHDOT, NEVER KICKS CATS, NATHDOT, NATHDOT, NATHDOT, CHARITABLE TOWARD ALL MANKIND, NATHDOT, 9 1/2" PENIS, NATHDOT, GREAT COOK, etc. etc.
Simply by flooding the source of information she'll be hard pressed if she can ever find that juvie record for arson and wilfull destruction of property.
Think Different.
I find it strange (Score:5, Interesting)
Small towns are truly a place where everyone *wants* to know your business, and it is assumed that you will be forthcoming with details of any knowledge you have of activities of interest. I live in a small town (moved from a city) and refrain from such gossip.
Interestingly,(and somewhat obviously)the less that people know about you, the more interesting you seem. If someone really wants to know something about me, all they need to do is ask.
It seems that technology, designed to facilitate communication, is only training people to communicate in a more impersonal way. Little glowing screens and and text messages, video phones, and what-have-you will not replace the immersion of face to face contact for an intimate relationship.
Besides, all that Google stuff about me having sex with midgets and pumpkins was taken totally out of context.
its not what google finds but more what it doesn't (Score:5, Insightful)
What surprised me most, however, was the information that didn't surface. While all of this trivial information found it's way to my monitor, the information I would have expected to appear didn't. A few years ago, during a low point in his life, he'd manage to amass quite a criminal record: a few semi-violent crimes (bar fights constitute assult) and an attempted felony, he had even been associated with a large hate group. None of that surfaced in my googling.
I guess the moral of the story is googling your date isn't exactly the most acurate way of checking his or her background if you're into that type of thing. I'm glad this information didn't surface in his case, as he's put his past behind him and started a new life. I don't think "ex-neo nazi skinhead" sends potential dates the right message on a first date. He's told his current girlfriend, but only when the relationship was a point where he felt okay in doing so, and she accepted it.
Anyway, that's my two cents.
Google and wireless web. (Score:5, Funny)
I can only imagine more of this as we get more into wearable computers or even wetware.
C'mon, baby, (Score:5, Funny)
Cheat dating? (Score:5, Interesting)
This summer I went on a blind date with a girl. We had some common interests but we just weren't hitting it off. Later that week I did a google search on her and found out that she was a pretty well respected artist. I read up on the artists she worked with, the school she studied at, the galleries she'd been in, and found that we had some common ground in art and new tech. The next time we went out, we had a fantastic three hour conversation about art and technology. I never told her about my google search.
Is that cheating?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Cheat dating? (Score:5, Funny)
Right.
Well, what if she was into mutilating chickens?
If you were an ass, you might just walk up to her in public and say "OH MY GOD YOU MUTILATE CHICKENS!"
If you weren't an ass, you might find some other reason to get the hell away from her.
And if you never did the search at all, you might end up in a dark forest in the middle of a chicken mutilating ceremony and then everything would be awkward!
(Sorry, I'm so in the mood for chicken cordon bleu right now.)
People ought to realize... (Score:5, Interesting)
That what they say online is often archived and then a part of the public record. I've said this many times online that what you will say cana nd will come back to haunt you.
It doesn't necessarily mean that Big Brother is watching. What it means is that if you develop a reputation online - a flame thrower, lunatic, nutcase, All-Information-Wants-To-Be-Free-Die-Private-Softw are-makers-Die - it might just come out in the least oppurtune times. During a job interview or say if the general public becomes net savvy at last...
Remember that Usenet convo that you are embarassed to think about? Yeah, we do too. Soon your future SOs and employers will be looking too.
THINK before you open your mouth. It was good advice before the net came about and its even better now.
Re:People ought to realize... (Score:3, Interesting)
so now we have this great little problem: say you use the same sn|alias|whatnot to talk on IM|whatnot with people you know in real life as you use, say, for
this makes people that exist more than others on the net valuable to manipulation
so, i guess what i want to say is that if you socialize on the net, and much that happens here is easily searchable, etc, you must be ready to provide quick bridging for some sort of integrity? or something? someone help me find the right words
otherwise people would get stuck with i-dont-want-to-blow-my-cover complexes and then the net as it currently is, with all the BSing, and CAPS LOCKS, and flam3bait1ng and l337 h4Xors would be no more... (the day the h4X0r kiddies fell silent?) which *might* be a good thing.. i dont know. but some certainly like it this way..
Am I missing something? (Score:5, Interesting)
And it goes both ways: If I've met someone new and they want me to briefly describe myself, I'm quite likely to tell them to google me instead. I've done lots of stuff over the years, and I'm likely to forget to mention whatever any particular person is most interested in.
It has nothing to do with potential amorous interests; googling people just makes sense. (Assuming, of course, that you can identify which person you're looking for out of those sharing the same name; but in my experience that isn't too hard.)
Another Option (Score:3, Interesting)
* This Jane Doe in Athens, GA is a black belt. Maybe you should work out now.
* This Jane Doe in Palo Alto has a PhD in Chemistry, maybe she doesn't burn all her food.
But anyway, I'm back to using it to check out hopeful dates.
Damn it editors (Score:5, Funny)
totally misconstrued (Score:3, Insightful)
Warning (Score:5, Funny)
So basically do exactly the opposite of what they'd do on Three's Company. Got it.
instead of googling ... (Score:3, Informative)
usually more fun (but less accurate/informative).
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Google can save you from embarrassment! (Score:3, Funny)
Googling as a verb... (Score:4, Insightful)
Google? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm religious but I'm not afraid to poke fun of my religion. Any like minded girl that can read "Justification for It's Existance" and not get offended at the line "Jesus tells the funniest stories when he's drunk" or "Dinner Party" and laugh at "Resurrected Jesus cookies" is a girl I want to get to know.
Researching someone on Google is lame. These days everyone and their dog and its chew toy has a web-site. If they don't have a personal site then stick to the old fashion "conversation."
Finding random spats of information someone wrote is an excellent way to get the wrong idea about them. Who knows when it was written, what they've gone through since then, ect. If someone wants others to know about them on-line, they'll put up a homepage and point you to it if you ever meet them.
I'd rather get to know someone before digging through their history and judging them without giving them a chance to explain. People change. They make mistakes. They move on.
Ben
It worked for me! (Score:4, Funny)
The local police blotter!
Thank you, Google! I still know where my wallet is because of you!
Tip: if you Google, don't bring it up (Score:4, Funny)
Damn it (Score:3, Funny)
Results: None.
WTF?
Challenge to illustrate a point. (Score:3, Informative)
With such a common name I have no idea how people think they can find out anything about a person on-line unless they've specifically made it available.
New Poll? (Score:3, Funny)
Quality, Speed, Price (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, it sounds like it might be a useful technique for someone who is an intelligent, discriminating reader and doesn't take anything at face value, but rather carefully evaluates sources for quality, context, and bias. But, frankly, that sounds like an awful lot of work and, let's face it, most people do have a tendency to take things at face value without scrutinizing the accuracy and bias of the source. Observed behavior is far more valuable information than what Google can offer regarding what a person is really like. What's their body language saying? What are their friends like? How do they treat friends, strangers, and family? What is their family of origin like? If you need help recognizing behavioral cues, pick up a good psychology/sociology/self-help book written by a credible expert.
As for employers making hiring decisions based on info from a Google search, that sounds like a lawsuit just waiting to happen. I'd want to be certain that Mr. Otherwise-Exceptionally-Qualified-Applicant-But-W
DC Sniper on Google (Score:3, Funny)
Searching for Dates? (Score:3, Funny)
2) Click "I'm Feeling Lucky"
Yeah, Randy Cohen is probably right. This is not a good idea.
For example, 1453 (Score:3, Interesting)
- The Ottoman Turks, led by Memed II, capture Constantinople: the end of the Byzantine Empire, 29 May
- Talbot defeated and slain at Castillon, Gascony, in final battle of The Hundred Years War, 17 July
- King Henry VI suffers mental collapse at royal manor of Clarendon, 1 August
- Queen Margaret gives birth to Edward, crown prince, 13 October
- Bordeaux, last English possession in Guyenne, surrenders to the French , 19 October
- Somerset arrested and confined to The Tower, 23 November
Without Google, I'd only have known about the fall of Constantinople and the end of the Hundred Years' War! Thanks Google!This can be a bad thing too (Score:3, Funny)
What a haunting experience that was.
Dates? (Score:3, Funny)
Everyone does this. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Everyone does this. (Score:3, Funny)
Impressed
Re:What happens when he/she finds out? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I did this... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Something similar... (Score:5, Funny)
Sadly, it pretty much describes my entire life. The only difference is that I consistently *do* ask the girl out, but to no avail. Oh well, I give myself points for trying.
Getting turned down by a chick has to be the single longest sound known to man. It seems like it takes forever to pass.
Me: "Hi, I was wondering if you would like to..." (gets cut off by chick)
Chick: "N-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
Me: "Ah, thank you miss, may I have another?"
Sigh.