3 ms·
"researchers could predict personal information based on non-obvious cues. Not everyone successfully predicted to be gay, for example, had Liked “Gay Marriage.”
by akozak 14y ago
"researchers could predict personal information based on non-obvious cues. Not everyone successfully predicted to be gay, for example, had Liked “Gay Marriage.”
Supporting gay marriage is an obvious cue of someone being gay?
- Zikes 14y agoI guess we'd better be careful about supporting marijuana legalization, too.
- thomasz 14y agoThe most disturbing takeaway from this article is that it's not necessary to "like" marijuana legalisation to be identified as a stoner. It can be inferred from your taste of music, movies, and so forth. More disturbing: Even if you are careful what you "like", your social network is probably a sufficient indicator. This shit scares the fucking hell out of me.
- illuminate 14y agoBesides, you can be married to an opposite-sex partner, vote against every gay marriage initiative on the ballot and still be gay.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoIt is written poorly, "Not everyone successfully predicted to be gay" defines the set of people who are both gay and predicted to be gay, but had not clicked 'like' on "Gay Marriage." The point I took away was that you could be successfuul predicted to be gay without, what some might see as an overt signal, "Liking" the topic Gay Marriage. Basically the other likes, the innocuous ones like Liking the show Arrested Development or Modern Family could predict things about you that you might not expect them to predict. I hope (and expect) that eventually there will be the huge unliking.