in either case it's a fascinating scandal :)
-
-
Replying to @doctorwhy @KirkegaardEmil and
matter of perspective, I suppose
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WhizdomePhD
.
@doctorwhy@KirkegaardEmil@EirikSovik@randal_olson reminds me of an OKC question: "In a certain light, wouldn't nuclear war be exciting"1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WhizdomePhD @doctorwhy and
apparently that Q is highly related to chance of first date sex http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-best-questions-for-first-dates/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @WhizdomePhD @doctorwhy and
With the open data, it's now possible to replicate that analysis. ;)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil @doctorwhy and
I wonder, if usernames were converted to hash (1-way conversion), would there be issue?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WhizdomePhD
yes there would be if the hash is deterministic, as input space small
@KirkegaardEmil@doctorwhy@EirikSovik@randal_olson1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @podehaye @KirkegaardEmil and
so anything semi-reversible is problem; goal of addl data scrape not possible
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WhizdomePhD
Any hash is reversible if one knows the seed. Hash solution possible only if one can hide the seed and still provide the hasher
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
yes, that was my goal here though, to still allow for future data merge; I understand how hashes work
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Easy solution is just to let only the research team merge the datasets and then remove usernames from public data.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.