Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE <3 <3 <3!!! 165

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the can-we-get-chicks dept.
Chapium writes "Google Romance (Beta) is a place where you can post all types of romantic information and, using our Soulmate Search(TM), get back search results that could, in theory, include the love of your life. Then we'll send you both on a Contextual DateTM, which we'll pay for while delivering to you relevant ads that we and our advertising partners think will help produce the dating results you're looking for. With this addtion has Google gone too far with its data collection?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE <3 <3 <3!!!

Comments Filter:
  • Oh, wait...
    • I really don't think this is a bad idea. As for the personal dating thing, have some video link on their Jabber server and make the 'first date' an online chat for the first date.

      Brings together what Google is good at - data search, and a good platform for selling ads on.
      • Dude, you *are* aware of what day this is, right?
        • I think he is. But he also has a point. It's not so far-fetched to think Google will get into this eventually, even if they joke about it know. They already have orkut [orkut.com], you know? And online dating services are moderately popular and an interesting type of site for advertising.

          More generally, Google <insert whatever word you want> Beta is not unlikely to happen eventually.

  • 404 (Score:5, Funny)

    by pikine (771084) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:18AM (#15041465) Journal
    Oh no, my soul mate is 404 Not Found.
  • Anyone else in?
  • This was such a funny coincidence with Slashdot's new girly style. :-)
  • How cute is this? Could Google get any more useful?
  • by geminidomino (614729) * on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:19AM (#15041476) Journal
    With this addtion has Google gone too far with its data collection?

    Even the April Fool's jokes have Google flamebait.
  • by mixonic (186166) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:22AM (#15041484) Homepage
    Ok, time to get april 1st started:

    Story contains "OMG": 1 shot
    Story contains Google, MS: get a beer
    Zonk says something foolish: shot of beer

    SLOW DOWN DAAMMIY!!11ToO muCh..1!!lk21;l1k
  • by PetriBORG (518266) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:23AM (#15041485) Homepage
    Now we really understand why google has collected so much data on everyone! They weren't doing Evil, just trying to get everyone dates.
  • by Ckwop (707653) * <Simon.Johnson@gmail.com> on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:23AM (#15041486) Homepage

    Imagine if Google profiled you by your Gmail account and web-searches, blogger entries, etc and was able to use this information to do a psychometric profile of you. It could then compare this with other people's profiles and suggest members of the opposite sex that it thinks you would most like!

    I don't know whether this would be cool or damn scarey. What's worse is that the only thing standing in the way of this happening is programmer time. What's amazing is how effectively we've created 1984 and in how little time we've done it.

    Simon

  • by Exaton (523551) <exaton.free@fr> on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:23AM (#15041488) Homepage
    From the FAQ [google.com] :
    3. What is Soulmate Search?
    Here on the Google Romance team, we follow the philosophy "Don't be medieval,"
    Fell off my chair or something ^^
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:25AM (#15041495)
    "I'm getting lucky"
  • 3. What is Soulmate Search?
    Here on the Google Romance team, we follow the philosophy "Don't be medieval," so we brought only the latest psychographic and search algorithms to bear on the problem of hooking up our users. First you fill out an extensive personal profile carefully designed by a team of both married and single Google engineers for the express purpose of gathering and analyzing romantic information. Then you fill out an equally obscure and elaborate profile describing various attributes of the p
    • Next tonight on copy/pasting random crap in an effort to glean some karma from other people's content:

      Will some of the subsections spin off as sites in their own right?

      For example, it would be cool if the YRO section were to hit dead tree form in some way like soon. It's too important to remain outside the radars of 9-5ers in Pleasantville.

      There are no formal plans at this time, but it's something we're thinking seriously about.

      Answered by: CmdrTaco
      Last Modified: 10/28/00

      I need information about Slash

  • would welcome our Google overlords, if only it wasn't the 1st of April. (always wanted to say that :P)
  • by c0l0 (826165)
    Who's that terrific babe on google's romance front-page? Maybe another cogent reason for the average heterosexual geek to want to work at google?
     
    In any case: ASL && more pix??
    • Well there is a lot more pictures of user A here in the tour [google.com].
      There are many nice little features to this aprils fools, I like the diffrent error messages and there is even a press release [google.com] about how the new tool was leaked to /.
      One would almost think that this was somehow coordinated between /. and google, these two april fools fit so well together.
  • by rocjoe71 (545053) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:26AM (#15041504) Homepage
    OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE <3 <3 <3!!!

    For those of you having difficulty with the above emoticons, take note they can be read in either of 2 ways:

    OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE less-than-three less-than-three less-than-three!!!

    -- Which means on a scale of 10, this site only rates a "3"

    OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls

    -- Which makes no sense whasoever, must be some kind of April fool's joke.

    • Search here [wikipedia.org] for "<3"...

      Your geek card has been confiscated.
      • Oh, good. I thought that maybe the "<3" meant that Google Romance was being prejudiced against polyamory, and that their service was only good for arranging romance among "less than three" people. One could also infer that their search engine might find that you deserve to be in a relationship of 1 person (just yourself) or 0 people (even you can't stand to be with you).

        I'm so glad to learn that the "<3 <3 <3" stands for three hearts, and as such is poly-friendly.

    • > less-than-three less-than-three less-than-three!!!

      mushroom mushroom

      > conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls

      snake, it's a snaaake!

    • OMG GOOGLE ROMANCE conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls, conical-penis-with-balls

      those are actually ass-cream cones.
  • by TimeForGuinness (701731) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:27AM (#15041505) Journal
    My Google Soulmate Search found an overweight girl living in her father's garage with orange cheeto stained fingers sucking down a Diet Mountain Dew posting messages on /. about how April Fools Day stories just aren't funny.

    She is my delicate flower.

  • by atroc (945553) *
    It keeps matching me up with a Level 20 White Wizard of Hagrath. I'm a guy, I don't want to date another guy, even if it IS a wizard!
  • So gay = bad? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SUB7IME (604466)
    I'm really impressed with the latent homophobia in nearly every single 'aprilfools' post so far today. The 'gay' tag? Is that necessary? It's really not funny.

    Maybe you could put 'fag' next time instead? OMG, like that would be SOOOO FUNNY!!!
    • Re:So gay = bad? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by geminidomino (614729) * on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:44AM (#15041566) Journal
      This is slashdot, online home of many many gamers. They use such terms.

      Slashdot also has a very healthy "words evolve" faction which holds that words do not mean anything other than what the speakers of the words think they mean, so if "gay" means "bad" it's not homophobia, it's evolution.

      I'm now taking signups for the "just fucking get over it, you're not that special" faction. Sign up now and get a free "There was only up to 1 cross in history that mattered, and yours ain't it." T-shirt.
      • 'When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
            --Humpty Dumpty
      • words do not mean anything other than what the speakers of the words think they mean, so if "gay" means "bad" it's not homophobia, it's evolution.

        Indeed. Take the word "suck," for example; a person I insultingly call "gay" is no more homosexual than a person I insultingly say "sucks". Or what about "jerk"? A "jerk" was originally someone who...jerked himself. Jerk has become a word accepted in society (its slang status notwithstanding), and "suck" is bordering at least passive acceptance.

        What about "SOB"? D
        • Let it be misconstrued that I agree with that group that says "words only mean what the speaker thinks they mean," I want to go on record as saying that I don't. If you can't find the words to say what you mean, it speaks less about the language and more about your education in it.

          That said, they still score higher in esteem than anyone who talks about being "offended" by words.
        • If I call you a "butthead" do you really excrete from your brain?
          No. The crap commonly comes out one's mouth.

          *ZING*

        • Take the word "suck," for example; a person I insultingly call "gay" is no more homosexual than a person I insultingly say "sucks".

          All that means is that the intolerant people who started using that as an insult got the term to spread so much that most people don't know how it started. That doesn't mean that the original intolerance should be forgiven, and there are many people out there who use "gay" as an insult because they think being gay is bad. I don't see how anyone can not understand how hurtful
          • The problem is, there are plenty of people out there who do care about your race or sexual orientation, and will treat you differently depending on them. To suggest otherwise is rather ridiculous.

            No. There aren't. People who would hate you for it are already looking for a reason to hate you, so it doesn't matter if race or sexual orientation is the answer they find. They're probably the same ones who'd accuse the straight WASP of being rich and intolerant.

            Race is probably harder to hide, but sexual orientat
            • You're assuming that there are two groups of people: people who are looking for something to hate everyone, and people who are looking for reasons why people hate them. The reality is that there are plenty, if not a majority of people in the gray area in between. Some of the nicest people I know really can't stand interacting with gay people and will treat them with less respect than they would straight people. They don't look for reasons to hate people, they just happen have a trait they dislike in a perso
      • Am I allowed to hate Christians and Gays for making so much god damned noise that this country is falling into the shitter faster than the scumbags at the top can flush?

        Just kidding! April Fools! You were saying something about 2000 year old fairy tales and their relationship to the civil rights granted under Jefferson's list o' rules...

        • Am I allowed to hate Christians and Gays for making so much god damned noise that this country is falling into the shitter faster than the scumbags at the top can flush?

          Why not? I do.

          You were saying something about 2000 year old fairy tales and their relationship to the civil rights granted under Jefferson's list o' rules...

          No I wasn't. If it's the t-shirt that convinced you otherwise, note the "up to" qualification. ;)
      • so if "gay" means "bad" it's not homophobia, it's evolution.

        Of course it's homophobia. The fact that a slur is unfortunately trendy doesn't make it less of a slur. Would you argue that to "jew someone down" isn't anti-Semitic merely because the expression was in common use?

        The expression "that's so gay" is considered the universal insult in American schools, something that would be readily rejected as vulgar if applied to any demographic besides gays.

      • Yeah, if I were gay I'd probably sign up for your new little faction. Instead, I'm actually just amazed that you're an apologist for bigotry. Nice work!
    • 'm really impressed with the latent homophobia in nearly every single 'aprilfools' post so far today. The 'gay' tag? Is that necessary? It's really not funny.

      You're gay. Gaaaaaaaayyyyy! (scnr)

    • Since all these AF stories are getting tagged 'gay'... here's a little joke to fit the context.

      So this kid is at a ballgame, and goes to take a whiz. As he's standing at the urinal, he loooks over and sees a cowboy standing next to him..

      Kid: Hey mister, are you a real cowboy??

      Cowboy: I sure am son, would you like to wear my hat?

      The kid happily accepts, and puts on the cowboy hat. Just as the kid is finishing up, a man in a sailor suit walks in and stands next to him..

      Kid: Hey mister, are you a real

    • I thought gay = happy? Didn't anyone ever watch the Flintstones?
  • Damn. I tried to use the search and it gave me an error. =(

    I guess I'll try again tomorrow.
  • I really hate that the term "Gay" is being used to tag all of these April Fools posts, but in this case it's actually appropriate:

    If everyone on Slashdot signed up for a dating service, the only ones who would find compatible mates would be the gay members.
    • by cribb (632424)
      not only are the articles 'gay', but reading them will *make* you gay.

      gay, adj.

      • cheery: bright and pleasant; promoting a feeling of cheer; "a cheery hello"; "a gay sunny room"; "a sunny smile"
      • full of or showing high-spirited merriment; "when hearts were young and gay"; "a poet could not but be gay, in such a jocund company"- Wordsworth; "the jolly crowd at the reunion"; "jolly old Saint Nick"; "a jovial old gentleman"; "have a merry Christmas"; "peals of merry laughter"; "a mirthful laugh"
  • Database Capacity Exceeded (again)
    That's just great - once again, the sheer volume of our users' thirst for our products has exceeded our capacity to quench it, therefore, deja vu, this service is not available at this time (at least not to you).


    I wish I had registered a little sooner .. :(
    Now I will never find romance !!
  • by Tarmas (954439) on Saturday April 01, 2006 @10:41AM (#15041560) Homepage
    8. Such as?

    Flowers. Music. Personal advice. E-greetings. Later on, depending on how our long-term opt-out natural-language-based monitoring system thinks things are going, personalized thank you notes, romantic getaway offers, various intimate pharmaceutical come-ons, engagement and bridal wear catalogs you know the drill.



    +------------
    | Ads by Goooooogle
    |
    | V 1 A G R A - En1arge yuor pen1$ n0w
    |
    | Advertise on this site
    +------------

  • http://www.google.com/romance/faq.html [google.com]

    It's a satire of Google's own business model. Their contextual ads and their Beta products.
    And it's biting. I'm just reminded why I like Google.

    6. What is Contextual Dating?
    It's a free date plus the added accrued value of the past decade's worth of post-Industrial Age online marketing genius, all tied into a real-time, video-based, GPS-tracked, psychographically astute and environmentally pervasive promotional system.

    7. Come again?
    You see ads that might make your date b
  • From the 404 page: This means that you either 1. Fell for our April Fool's joke, in which case ha ha, wasn't that amusing and harmless and mostly in good taste and not all psychologically damaging under various and sundry aspects of contemporary tort law, please don't sue us;

    Not at all psychological damaging?!?!

    Just while all this pinkness and cute pictures of fluffy little animals has managed to stirred up long abandoned faint hopes of locating a perfect soulmate, your preposterous prank has shattered

  • OMG ? (Score:2, Funny)

    by mennucc1 (568756)
    would someone please explain me what OMG stands for ?
  • Google date just announced? I thought thats why the 'I'm Feeling Lucky' button was designed. Its all clear. Always wondered why when searching for some idiot who would actually shag me, the result was generally the white house George W. Bush bio page.
  • Unless you read right-to-left, <3 = "ball sac".
  • by Anonymous Coward
    This is Google's way of introducing a dating service without it looking like it was their idea. After all, it's embarassing.

    Google builds Google Romance.

    They're ambivalent about introducing it.

    Product Manager has the brilliant idea to introduce it as a joke, monitor interest, and later claim, "Oh, it started as a joke, but people really wnated it, so we did it."
  • slashcode bug (Score:2, Informative)

    by arabagast (462679)
    It seems like slashcode removes the from the title of the article in the title tag in the HTML. Probably not the gravest bug, but still :) You'd never expect something useful coming out of 1. April, but there you go.
    • apparantly the lameness filter, combined with me not bothering to preview, removed the alligator from my post too.. hmmm,, lameness filter in TITLE tag, that's a nice one.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    They should have a "Get laid" button, me thinks.
  • It's called Google Date-a-Base [google.com]
  • by mqj (949877)
    Invite a friend... "Would you like to be a part of this romance MFF?"
  • This April Fools joke wouldn't have happened if Google had a serious interest in online dating -- it wouldn't make sense to ridicule a business concept and then enter the business.

    Match.com and competitors are breathing a sigh of relief today ...

  • I searched for "Arrogant Prick" and it returned my own profile as a result. WTF??

If it smells it's chemistry, if it crawls it's biology, if it doesn't work it's physics.

Working...