The only issue I have with @@KirkegaardEmil study is that he did not anonymize the dataset. https://artir.wordpress.com/2016/05/13/in-defense-of-emil-kirkegaard/ …
-
-
Replying to @hashfyre
The dataset is anonymized because it doesn't actually have people's real names. Just their already public pseudonyms.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
then I have no clue what people are crying about, all pseudonyms are supposed to be public.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hashfyre
also only their public answers. One can answer privately but most don't.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
.
@KirkegaardEmil Not public.Only public to other@OKCupid users.@hashfyre#anonymity#ethicsfail#peerreview#okcupid#dataset#datascrape1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Nope, you can use a standard scrapper to gather it, if you can Google your profile, it's public.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hashfyre
Some profiles are public, others are not (not sure what the system is). Google has a larger dataset of OKCupid than I have. ;)
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
Also remember 2014 http://www.wired.com/2014/01/how-to-hack-okcupid/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Actually, multiple people approached me saying they also scraped OKCupid, but they just didn't publish the dataset (AFAIK).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.