Did you know that when you are on the Internet, it’s always phishing season? You won’t be catching any perch, but you will definitely be having shiny toys dangled in front of you to try to bait and lure you in. Believe it or not, there are people on the Internet always at the ready to take advantage of you.
It’s February. Spring is around the corner, but winter still lets us know that we are The Great White North, reminding us of our favourite season here in Canada. That’s okay, because we have a fantastic holiday filled with warmth and love coming up! No, not that one... It’s Family Day! Family Day is a holiday meant to spend with family to create, share and foster memories with those that mean so much to us all.
Current research reveals that online daters spend an average of 22 minutes each time they visit an online dating site and often log in more than 12 hours a week of computer based dating activity. Despite all of this time spent in the pursuit of love, a common complaint shared by online daters is the low response rate by potential love interests. A recent study by Berkeley, adds merit to this commonly held belief finding that for every 10 posts on a personal ad or dating site, men receive on average 3 responses while women received slightly higher results. Given the ever increasing popularity of Match.com, Plenty of fish and other virtual dating sites, there is a new focus on understanding this new societal trend through the lens of big data. In particular, there is a vested interest by the more than 1,500 online dating sites in North America that generate over 1.5 billion dollars every year to use big data to increase the success rates of its users. So what exactly does big data reveal about online dating and response rates?
According to Maclean’s Magazine (2013) an estimated 30 to 40 million North Americans now use online dating sites to look for love. Contributing over $1.5 billion to the industry, a quarter of all Canadians have tried Internet dating and 16 percent have had cybersex.
At the risk of sparking controversy, I would like to briefly address the so called “social code” that governs how we communicate in the digital world. Broadly referred to as “Netiquette”, or the “Golden Rules for the Internet”, I recently discovered an article in The New York Times that addresses the extreme complexity of trying to define proper behavior on the Internet.
Have you ever had the experience where you go online to check something quick and innocuous like an address or a movie review only to find yourself being sucked into the black hole of the Internet where time seems to stand still? Come on, be honest, there is nothing to be ashamed of, we are all TekSavvy friends here!
From time to time a security bug or vulnerability emerges from the woodwork and sweeps quickly across the Internet. But it’s been a while since we saw much on the scale of Heartbleed , a newly-discovered vulnerability that has created a stir in the blogosphere and in the news.
Recently, while listening to a CBC podcast on the use of the Internet as a tool to fight social injustice, I found my own well established views of what constitutes good and evil blurring ever so slightly around the edges. The episode, “Anonymous and the Rehtaeh Parsons Case: Online Avengers or an Online Lynch Mob?”, recounted the actions taken by anonymous activists, self-titled “online avengers” to seek justice on behalf of Retaeh Parsons, the 17 year old Dartmouth teen who was allegedly cyberbullied for years and died following a suicide attempt.