These are the ones the government asked for.
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~dangelo/aol-search-query-logs/
Lol @
Quotenewby@overkill:~/qclass_testcollection$ grep -i "nigger" porn.dat
i love niggers
newby@overkill:~/qclass_testcollection$ grep -i "nigger" *.dat
news.dat:i love niggers
porn.dat:i love niggers
Isn't that kind of an invasion of privacy?
/me nods.
Looks like it got taken down. :|
But it got
MIRRORED (http://www.gregsadetsky.com/aol-data/). Grab it while ye can.
EDIT -- An AOL spokesperson commented on the subject!
QuoteAndrew Weinstein Says:
August 7th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
All –
This was a screw up, and we’re angry and upset about it. It was an innocent enough attempt to reach out to the academic community with new research tools, but it was obviously not appropriately vetted, and if it had been, it would have been stopped in an instant.
Although there was no personally-identifiable data linked to these accounts, we’re absolutely not defending this. It was a mistake, and we apologize. We’ve launched an internal investigation into what happened, and we are taking steps to ensure that this type of thing never happens again.
Here was what was mistakenly released:
* Search data for roughly 658,000 anonymized users over a three month period from March to May.
* There was no personally identifiable data provided by AOL with those records, but search queries themselves can sometimes include such information.
* According to comScore Media Metrix, the AOL search network had 42.7 million unique visitors in May, so the total data set covered roughly 1.5% of May search users.
* Roughly 20 million search records over that period, so the data included roughly 1/3 of one percent of the total searches conducted through the AOL network over that period.
* The searches included as part of this data only included U.S. searches conducted within the AOL client software.
Our apologies again.
Andrew Weinstein
AOL Spokesperson
I don't see why they took it down. Atleast if they'd leave it up it would be viewed as a legit attempt to further research and it would be a less evil act. But now that they took it down the bad guys already have it and will use it while the good guys will be left without it. Go figure.
BTW, I really don't see what the big deal is, as with all companies if they want to give away information about what you do on their services so be it. Its comparable to AT&T and the phone call database. If a company willingly gives it away their isn't anything you can do about it but cry and complain to your mommy. Afterall its not like they gave away credit card numbers or other very personal information.
Quote from: zorm on August 08, 2006, 03:01:53 AM
I don't see why they took it down. Atleast if they'd leave it up it would be viewed as a legit attempt to further research and it would be a less evil act. But now that they took it down the bad guys already have it and will use it while the good guys will be left without it. Go figure.
BTW, I really don't see what the big deal is, as with all companies if they want to give away information about what you do on their services so be it. Its comparable to AT&T and the phone call database. If a company willingly gives it away their isn't anything you can do about it but cry and complain to your mommy. Afterall its not like they gave away credit card numbers or other very personal information.
It can totally be a privacy violation. What if somebody searched for their own name, out of curiosity, then a few weeks later searched for "gay men with small penises"? Then suddenly, as his friends are poking trough the list, it ruins his reputation and his life. And I wouldn't be surprised if that situation happens.
And I don't think that the good guys or bad guys will ever be without the list. Anybody who wants it can very easily obtain it.
Quote from: iago on August 08, 2006, 09:36:10 AM
...i... searched for..., out of curiosity, ... gay men with small penises...
I caught you red handed! Ewww.