The Verge reports that Match.com reactivated a bunch of old profiles, without asking. This raises many concerns about user data for those that might have missed the Facebook discussions recently.
[...] A Match Group spokesperson confirmed that a “limited number” of old accounts had been accidentally reactivated recently and that any account affected received a password reset. Match.com’s current privacy statement, which was last updated in 2016, says that the company can “retain certain information associated with your account” even after you close it. But that Match Group spokesperson also told The Verge that the company plans to roll out a new privacy policy “in the next month or so,” in order to comply with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); under the new policy, all those years-old accounts will be deleted. The Verge has requested clarification on which accounts will qualify for deletion, and what “deletion” will specifically entail, but has not received a response as of press time.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday April 26 2018, @02:55AM (1 child)
They delete your access
They delete your data
They delete you [wikipedia.org]
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Fluffeh on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:51AM
No, you've got it all wrong.
You delete your account.
They delete your access.
No data is deleted.
Your data is continually sold on for advertising, soliciting, research or marketing purposes.
It is just that sometimes accidentally the sheets are thrown back showing everything to everyone - just like what happened here.
You gave a company your info. Accept that whatever you give away is stored/used permanently and in perpetuity.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by archfeld on Thursday April 26 2018, @02:57AM (3 children)
That's just what I need is for a friend of the GF to see a zombie profile of me on a dating site...
It would be like getting into the cash cab and having the wife see you with the mistress on your way to a hotel.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:42AM (2 children)
It's not just that having profiles activated that aren't live is a way of boosting their numbers to pretend like it's a better deal than it really is.
Online dating tends to suck. The women tend to be more or less hookers just looking for some guy with the money and resources they want and are more than willing to fuck themselves over in the process. It's amazing to me how many women on there are in their late 30s because they didn't understand the concepts of the wall and the biological clock. A woman in her 30s likely needs fertility help to get pregnant and a woman approaching 40 is likely unable to conceive at all, even with help.
And yet those 30 something women behave like they've still got the leverage even as their looks fade and they have nothing much else to offer.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @01:48PM (1 child)
Nice to see beta male cucks and feminists still get mod points here. Hate to rock the boat by calling women out for misbehavior. Couldn't have that.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @09:28PM
Next time add on that men tend to be very shallow and even ugly fuckers will only want the hotty. Also men tend to send nasty shit to women.
Not addressing that part of the online dating scene just shows you to be a mysoginistic angry nerd, further cemented by your tantrum about beta cucks and feminists.
Get help, meditate, whatever works for you.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:14AM (3 children)
Just how big was that database to begin with? Pretty sure it could have affected everyone and that would still be "a limited number."
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:27AM
I dunno, they might have created an algorithm to create profiles for each child of anyone who used their service.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by anubi on Thursday April 26 2018, @09:59AM (1 child)
"A limited number" is the businesstalk intended to imply a shortage to urge a prompt buy while still available.
Its amazing how the English language can be used to imply all sorts of things.
Advertisers are skilled at every conceivable verbal hook to make verbal illusions that only appear to convey substance but in reality only take up airtime.
They usually have 60 seconds to fill with verbiage that gives the illusion of being useful, but commit to absolutely nothing. Even the price is a farce. Just pay separate fee.
They must be aiming at real dummies. All they do is infuriate me with their verbal trickery.
Listen critically to some TV ads, and see how craftily they use words to give you the illusion you will receive a product for a price. After a while, you will pick up on the various tricks they use.
Do you really want to initiate contact with someone who has already shown they are trying to trick you?
Think he will suddenly act honestly with you if he gets your name, credit card, and payment credentials?
Most of those ads only convince me the company pushing the product is no different than a hustler trying to involve me in a shell game - and I would be best to avoid contact with him if at all possible.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday April 26 2018, @05:41PM
It's not exactly that they're aiming at dummies. They've generally got their minds in so much of a rut that they can't think any other way than insincerely. I've never seen an ISP contract that didn't promise connection speeds "up to" so many baud. So what they're promising that that they won't give you faster service. And they did that even back when contracts were mainly between companies, and would be reviewed by lawyers.
These days I believe companies have noticed that loophole, and if they've got leverage tend to demand average minimum speeds to be specified. But if you don't have leverage, you still get (the last time I checked) a promise of "up to" so many baud rather than a promise of some average level of service or better. They don't care whether you realize they're selling froth (i.e., they're not aiming at dummies), but only that you don't have the leverage to demand a better contract.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:30AM (2 children)
Accept it. Embrace it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Spamalope on Thursday April 26 2018, @08:49AM
This is 'copy it between multiple corporate shells' so that they can pinky swear and say they have delete it from the shell you sent your request too. The other 10 shells and all the 3rd parties of course still have the data, and we of course sync the databases and will copy it back via that mechanism. But we really did delete your information from the servers, we just didn't tell you it it'll be temporary.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Thursday April 26 2018, @10:08AM
Tell this to those that lost data to ransomware.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:56AM (1 child)
Match has done this sort of crap before-- keep old profiles to boost their numbers, and other dirty tricks to drag things out and collect more money. Like, sending teaser messages just as a member is leaving. Naturally they have to re-up to read the message.
Was it an accident like Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction"?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @09:04AM
Many, many moons ago in a previous^^3 job....
Part of my job as postmaster@ was to block both the usual UBE/UCE and email of a category that, as my boss put it, 'would bring the organisation's name into disrepute¹', and this is where the online dating scammers come into this story. A set of general 'catchall' filter rules on the MTAs started trapping a number of messages indicating that some people were using their organisation email address to sign up to these sites, stupid, very very stupid, so an experiment was carried out to prove a point.
Two identical profiles were created on a certain online dating site, the only differences being the names and the email addresses used (both created specifically for this task, one being a generic user@hotmail and the other being a bogus.user@our.organisation) we then sat back and watched.
Long story short, over several months the bogus.user@our.organisation got far more responses, and, significantly, a lot more UCE/UBE.
Bear in mind, that the only place these email addresses had been used were on this site, the conclusion being that the @our.organisation email address was more 'valuable' to this lot and scored higher on their search algorithms, so after throwing the information upstairs for the PHBs to mull, the edict went out to all and sundry that if you want to use these services, use a throwaway or personal email account, and not the one the organisation provided for work related use.
Coda: several months after this episode, a gentle reminder was sent out to a number of people that all phone calls to-fro outside the organisation were recorded², and that the phones were provided for work related use, this might have had something to do with one of the direct-dial extensions being publicly visible on a BDSM dating site, and it didn't take a genius to find out where this number was geographically located and to what organisation it belonged (indeed, was found by one of the security wonks who'd been doing online searches on the primary part of the organisation's phone number as part of another matter, then one thing led to another³...)
¹ The organisation was (and still is) *very* touchy about it's public image, and has attack lawyers to spare who'd quite happily savage 'internal' threats with the same 'gusto' they'd employ on external ones.
² They probably were, my previous^^2 job had several rack mounted 1" multi-track Reel-to-Reel voice loggers on the telephone exchange.
³ In this case, they were less worried about the 'gutter press' getting hold of the information than the people ('..other matter..') they were then worried about.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday April 26 2018, @04:11AM
wonder how many of the "old" profiles got messages from potentials?
How many of *those* were an improvement on the owner's current partner?
Some may be happy this happened!
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 1) by anubi on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:46AM (2 children)
Well, gotta admit I was looking for companionship and gave OKCupid a try.
It did not work for me.
I was wanting a companion, what I was getting was gold-diggers and fuck-buddies.
But, really, what business does an old fart like me have in something like that anyway?
Church did not have any ( or at least any around my age ), and I flat do not like bars.
This leaves just the hardware store or my neighbors who may lose their spouse. But so far, no go.
This is something really hard to advertise for, as dropping invitations like this is like dropping chum in shark infested water. I was never able to attract what I wanted, rather I only spent resources stirring up the attention of predators.
I have no idea if they still have my entry up still or not, as I lost access years ago.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday April 26 2018, @10:24AM
You make it sound like a choice between hammering your neighbour's spouse or hammering an anvil. (grin)
...
Either way seems fine to me, just don't forget to use the appropriate tool for the job. Don't, I repeat do not under any circumstances, use a hammer on your neighbour's family members, that's bad, mkay?
For the reverse, I have no doubts that using an anvil with your other tool will likely be an one-off experience, so I won't worry that much. (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @03:10PM
Any maker spaces near you? That might be a good place to hang out and share your expertise. I know you aren't looking for the kids, but maybe a single parent will be transporting the kid...
(Score: 4, Funny) by realDonaldTrump on Thursday April 26 2018, @07:26AM (2 children)
You give them $19, they erase your cyber. They call it "paid delete." Very discreet!!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Spamalope on Thursday April 26 2018, @08:45AM
Why would the paid delete remove data from anything other than the servers that corporate shell owns? They of course can't control what their 'partners' do with the information we transfer to them daily. You'll need to negotiate separately with each of them once you discover we've done that and complete a legal process to force us to disclose that we done this and to whom we've transferred your information. In the meantime the information will be moved to additional shell companies. Eventually you may discover the actual parent company that owns the shells, and that gives them plenty of warning that there is profit to be made by moving the data to a 3rd party you'll have to pay also.
(Score: 3, Touché) by bob_super on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:25PM
$19 is four orders of magnitude cheaper than your habitual means, who has to be temporarily laying low.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 27 2018, @04:31AM
It's not fair only FaceTwit gets to have millions of ghost users. I understand it sure helps getting that sweet funding...