If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Nature Network)   You know your marriage is on the rocks when even Facebook predicts you're going to get a divorce   (mnn.com) divider line 65
    More: Sad, Facebook  
•       •       •

10969 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Oct 2013 at 8:04 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-30 07:15:22 AM
You know individualism has surrendered to corporate control when they can build complex models and predict our behaviors based on all the information we freely provide.

To predict a thing is to control a thing.
 
2013-10-30 08:12:14 AM
...or exploit a thing, at the very least
 
2013-10-30 08:12:39 AM
It's funny to see complex studies like this and the real world effects they don't have on ad targeting.  For all the effort these guys spend figuring out who's going to marry who, the advertisers are still using broader targeting, because it's easier and works just as well.

After my ex and I had been "in a relationship" for a year, Facebook abruptly started showing her ads for wedding rings and me ads for dating web sites.  Really didn't need any complex graph theory for that algorithm.

/ These days I get everything from crappy social games to "send wire transfers to sri lanka!".  I think they've just given up on targeting and let the spammers have it.
 
2013-10-30 08:12:56 AM
It's a lot easier when Facebook knows your private messages with your mistress.
 
2013-10-30 08:13:47 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: You know individualism has surrendered to corporate control when they can build complex models and predict our behaviors based on all the information we freely provide.

To predict a thing is to control a thing.


Well luckily we still control our health care.

/Freedom!

//Jerbs!!
 
2013-10-30 08:14:54 AM
They got all that just from my status update "Biatch wife is out of town this weekend. Any shaved twinks down for slamming some ether and playing 'Rotisserie Chicken' in my rumpus room" and that time I mistook the status bar for a Google search and looked up "Hitman Wife Discount?"
 
2013-10-30 08:19:19 AM

serial_crusher: / These days I get everything from crappy social games to "send wire transfers to sri lanka!".  I think they've just given up on targeting and let the spammers have it.


FB's never been great at targeting me, either. Then again, I'm not really a good consumer. Hard to build a profile when you feed it no data.
 
2013-10-30 08:20:02 AM
So my lack of friends and general disdain for communicating on Facebook protects me from computerized data mining?

Finally, my unsociable, introverted nature pays off!  Thanks internet!
 
2013-10-30 08:21:37 AM

NightGuard: So my lack of friends and general disdain for communicating on Facebook protects me from computerized data mining?

Finally, my unsociable, introverted nature pays off!  Thanks internet!


Well, you still have all of the trackers on just about every website. There are at least 8 on this page alone.
 
2013-10-30 08:21:37 AM
The model has nothing to do with marriages, but is a study of relationships. If you introduce your sig to your friends/family, the relationship tend to be serious.

So all this is looking at is people who haven't gotten serious yet, or those who have separated their social lives. Never a good sign for a marriage.
 
2013-10-30 08:22:11 AM

serial_crusher: After my ex and I had been "in a relationship" for a year, Facebook abruptly started showing her ads for wedding rings and me ads for dating web sites. Really didn't need any complex graph theory for that algorithm.



After I changed my status to divorced, I got a few months worth of "senior dating" ads. That was mildly insulting.
 
2013-10-30 08:24:26 AM
If a prospective partner is already embedded within a large cluster of mutual friends, then maybe there's less to be gained from making it more than friends.

Because if there's one thing that relationships are about, it's gaining access to those sweet, sweet alternate networks.
 
2013-10-30 08:39:38 AM
Hari Seldon nods approvingly.
 
2013-10-30 08:42:09 AM

BigBooper: The model has nothing to do with marriages, but is a study of relationships. If you introduce your sig to your friends/family, the relationship tend to be serious.

So all this is looking at is people who haven't gotten serious yet, or those who have separated their social lives. Never a good sign for a marriage.

www.mississippiautoarms.com

 
2013-10-30 08:46:13 AM
I cannot trust Facebook as far as I could throw it. I just do not see what is so fun about being in everyone's business all the time. I value privacy.
 
2013-10-30 08:50:00 AM
I get AARP, cemetery and funeral ads and I'm only 43. Do they know something I don't?
 
2013-10-30 08:53:39 AM
Their algorithm won't work on me:  My relationship chart is a directed acyclic graph.  All communication follows a strict topological ordering.
 
2013-10-30 08:55:52 AM

pkellmey: I get AARP, cemetery and funeral ads and I'm only 43. Do they know something I don't?


Do your parents post about their health issues frequently?
 
2013-10-30 08:57:52 AM

phaseolus: serial_crusher: After my ex and I had been "in a relationship" for a year, Facebook abruptly started showing her ads for wedding rings and me ads for dating web sites. Really didn't need any complex graph theory for that algorithm.


After I changed my status to divorced, I got a few months worth of "senior dating" ads. That was mildly insulting.


After we started consolidating our debts, we started getting all sorts of promises of pre-approved loans for cars.  I wanted to face palm them personally.

/we haven't used a credit card or taken out a new loan in 6 years, and still have credit card debt.
 
2013-10-30 09:00:04 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: You know individualism has surrendered to corporate control when they can build complex models and predict our behaviors based on all the information we freely provide.

To predict a thing is to control a thing.


It's going to rain tomorrow.
 
2013-10-30 09:02:03 AM

meh.: Hari Seldon nods approvingly.


Somehow I don't think that FB is on a mission to save the civilization.

In fact, we should have an organisation to keep taps on FB - it should be located on the opposite end of the internet.
 
2013-10-30 09:03:41 AM

serial_crusher: pkellmey: I get AARP, cemetery and funeral ads and I'm only 43. Do they know something I don't?

Do your parents post about their health issues frequently?


No, though I do have a fairly large (and growing) number of high school friends who are dying/have died from cancer in the last 3 years.
 
2013-10-30 09:11:39 AM
I don't understand this model. Is the finding suggesting that the fewer mutual friends you have who are also friends the more likely you are to last as a couple?

Admittedly I barely RTFA and am really wishing I could have coffee.
 
2013-10-30 09:12:12 AM
i512.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-30 09:13:46 AM
I keep getting ads about meeting hot seniors, but they are always female.  I think I will go check out the hubby's page.  BRB
 
2013-10-30 09:21:07 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: Lenny_da_Hog: You know individualism has surrendered to corporate control when they can build complex models and predict our behaviors based on all the information we freely provide.

To predict a thing is to control a thing.

It's going to rain tomorrow.


Put out the rainbarrel, open the floodgates, put up the top on your car, close your windows, and take your umbrella.
 
2013-10-30 09:25:24 AM

Persnickety: Their algorithm won't work on me:  My relationship chart is a directed acyclic graph.  All communication follows a strict topological ordering.


You must be fun at parties.
 
2013-10-30 09:27:07 AM
Makes sense to me.  I'm not facebook friends with my GF's family or her friends.  So on a map, she would stand out by herself. Unlike all my friends from college / high school / work, who are all interconnected.
 
2013-10-30 09:30:54 AM
Ads? I don't recall seeing ads on Facebook. I guess I just tune those things out.

Don't see any ads on Fark either, come to think of it...
 
2013-10-30 09:32:42 AM

phaseolus: ...or exploit a thing, at the very least


No, to destroy a thing is to control a thing.

nihonshukyo.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-10-30 09:33:52 AM
Because why not.
img.fark.net

Here's my theory based on the average facebook user I observe as per my anecdotal experience (my own account doesn't qualify, I don't keep the minimum 50 friends for this algorithm), but here's a best guess (doesn't help neither the NYT nor linked page understand what they are writing about).

Remember, Dispersion is accurate 60% of the time, 100% of the time.
 
2013-10-30 09:40:41 AM

tira: Because why not.
[img.fark.net image 530x300]

Here's my theory based on the average facebook user I observe as per my anecdotal experience (my own account doesn't qualify, I don't keep the minimum 50 friends for this algorithm), but here's a best guess (doesn't help neither the NYT nor linked page understand what they are writing about).

Remember, Dispersion is accurate 60% of the time, 100% of the time.


I make sure no one from my work is a fb friend. That is just asking for trouble.
 
2013-10-30 09:42:31 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: NightGuard: So my lack of friends and general disdain for communicating on Facebook protects me from computerized data mining?

Finally, my unsociable, introverted nature pays off!  Thanks internet!

Well, you still have all of the trackers on just about every website. There are at least 8 on this page alone.


FARK is one of the sites I fear the most.  I wouldn't like the profile that would be put together on me by the pages I visit, the pages I visit more than once, and the comments I click smart, funny or reply to.
 
2013-10-30 09:43:25 AM

belhade: Ads? I don't recall seeing ads on Facebook. I guess I just tune those things out.

Don't see any ads on Fark either, come to think of it...


I was on OkCupid last night (don't judge me!) and they had a creative approach.  They put a banner on the right that says "hey, we notice you're using AdBlock, and that's cool, but we really like making money for our work.  How about you just give us $5 right now and we'll never show you ads again? [payment link]"  So I did it.
 
2013-10-30 09:44:54 AM

pkellmey: tira: Because why not.
[img.fark.net image 530x300]

Here's my theory based on the average facebook user I observe as per my anecdotal experience (my own account doesn't qualify, I don't keep the minimum 50 friends for this algorithm), but here's a best guess (doesn't help neither the NYT nor linked page understand what they are writing about).

Remember, Dispersion is accurate 60% of the time, 100% of the time.

I make sure no one from my work is a fb friend. That is just asking for trouble.


I have a lot of them despite the trouble.  I just wait until HR comes and has a chat with me about not offending people, then I unfriend all the likely tattlers.  A lot of my coworkers are genuinely also my friends, so it makes sense to Facebook them.
 
2013-10-30 09:45:30 AM
Are there public tools available to draw graphs like that?
 
2013-10-30 09:58:49 AM

pkellmey: I make sure no one from my work is a fb friend. That is just asking for trouble.


I just don't put anything that would get me fired or otherwise screw up my life on Facebook.  No matter hard you try, keeping that stuff truly private is a losing battle.  So yeah, people are snooping on my Facebook information.  Big deal; it's already public.
 
2013-10-30 10:04:54 AM

NightGuard: So my lack of friends and general disdain for communicating on Facebook protects me from computerized data mining?

Finally, my unsociable, introverted nature pays off!  Thanks internet!


Check out this one weird trick to gaining friends and becoming more sociable...
 
2013-10-30 10:11:02 AM
Does anyone know how to generate a graph like this?  I'd like to know if I'm getting divorced anytime soon.  I found http://www.wolframalpha.com/facebook/, but I'm too lazy to see if it does that :P
 
2013-10-30 10:14:58 AM
Did I just read that Facebook correctly identifies a user's romantic interest 60% of the time.  So it's wrong 40% of the time?  Of that 40%, if you have a low dispersion of friends (no indicator of how many people have low dispersion vs. other), you're 50% more likely to end your relationship than people with high dispersion.  Umm..thanks?

How did they confirm the 60% accuracy for 1.3 million users, how did they confirm inaccuracy for 40% for 1.3 million users, and how did it confirm the end of the relationship of that low dispersion group?
They f*cking didn't.  They extracted data and made some huge assumptions.
/Science!
 
2013-10-30 10:15:24 AM

Hollie Maea: pkellmey: I make sure no one from my work is a fb friend. That is just asking for trouble.

I just don't put anything that would get me fired or otherwise screw up my life on Facebook.  No matter hard you try, keeping that stuff truly private is a losing battle.  So yeah, people are snooping on my Facebook information.  Big deal; it's already public.


I worked with two individuals in the past that were fired from their jobs. One of the reasons were "public postings" that someone found offensive. In both cases, it was not something that the individual posted, but someone they knew posted that fb did not restrict others from seeing or fb had a recent change that allowed others to see the post. Both of them had other issues as well that were the real problems, but most social media apps have poor/non-standard/ever-changing support for restricting access to what others can see and could be bad for business.
 
2013-10-30 10:16:13 AM
Facebook free for almost a year now.  My smugness irritates you, doesn't it?
 
2013-10-30 10:17:13 AM

FoxEWolf: I cannot trust Facebook as far as I could throw it. I just do not see what is so fun about being in everyone's business all the time. I value privacy.


There is an area between private and letting everyone know all your business. It's the social realm, or what my grandmother referred to as not talking about money, religion,or politics. Sex is tricky (and grandma left it off the list because it was not openly spoken of). If you're in a relationship that you want it acknowledged, that's one thing. Get engaged or married, and you have a relationship the public can acknowledge. Move in with someone, and that's something to be noted, too. That you scored Friday night, not so much.

Telling everyone every minute how very in love you are or, what you're fighting about, and who is trying to steal your man/woman falls out of the social and into the private. Fighting with siblings, cousins, and friends publicly just makes everyone else uncomfortable. Making private things public is a form of whoring, and it's usually a good idea to avoid that.
 
2013-10-30 10:17:40 AM
Firefox and Ghostery appears to be dealing with this sort of thing fairly well...  I can't recall seeing ads when I actually bother with Facebook.

All they'd get from me is that I'm married, have children and well.. not really much else.
 
2013-10-30 10:21:01 AM
Nana's Vibrator:
How did they confirm the 60% accuracy for 1.3 million users, how did they confirm inaccuracy for 40% for 1.3 million users, and how did it confirm the end of the relationship of that low dispersion group?
They f*cking didn't.  They extracted data and made some huge assumptions.
/Science!


Well, they did specify that "All of the profiles sampled listed a spouse or romantic partner in their profile.", so that explains the first two. And I'm gonna take a wild guess here and assume they also used the relationship status to confirm the end of the relationship?
 
2013-10-30 10:38:15 AM
Having watched my neighbors kids list friends as spouses for fun and amusement and change it regularly I have to wonder how accurate the data they're working with is.
 
2013-10-30 10:42:55 AM
If they're see a lack of dispersion as a bad thing for a relationship, I think it's less a reality about the relationship than an artifact in Facebook data. People who friend everyone they ever meet are awful, terrible people who often have friends that are also awful, terrible "I friend everyone" people. Everyone interconnects because they are so full of bullshiat that they can't help but do so.That their relationships don't last is not surprising.
 
2013-10-30 10:51:09 AM
From TFA:

"The ideal partner - the one most likely to stick around, anyway - is the one that connects you with networks of people who you might not otherwise have associated with. "

I can tell you THEY GOT THAT RIGHT!
 
2013-10-30 11:22:56 AM
My partner and I are both minor celebrities in our particular cultures so we each have way too many "friends" on FB and not so much overlap.  Pretty sure that's gonna throw off the curve.

/or we're doomed, DOOMED!!!
 
2013-10-30 11:25:16 AM

serial_crusher: It's funny to see complex studies like this and the real world effects they don't have on ad targeting.  For all the effort these guys spend figuring out who's going to marry who, the advertisers are still using broader targeting, because it's easier and works just as well.


No, they're really not.  A good friend of mine codes for the Google division which targets ads to maximize clicks based on demographics of site users, and he's shared with me some of what he's allowed to share...They spend time and money matching ads with user demos to maximize click thrus.  I'm quite certain you're mistaken.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report