
Actual Facebook Graph Searches - ig1
http://actualfacebookgraphsearches.tumblr.com/
======
GuiA
With great power comes great responsibility.

Companies such as Facebook and the like undoubtedly draw great power from
their "social graph"; however, human interactions are subtle, complex,
multifaceted and often contradictory.

Nothing good can come out of applying dumb algorithms (that is, any algorithm)
to a sufficiently rich "social graph"; it will always lead to situations like
that which are, at best, embarrassing, and at worst, dangerous, for whoever is
in the system.

I don't think it's a matter of doing things the right way or fixing them-
trying to put human relationships in a computer system will never reproduce
the human experience (however, you may make marketers very happy). The best
you can do is complete certain very focused subsets of it in an interesting
way.

Zuckerberg's views on privacy and openness are laughable, and to be completely
expected from someone of his background and world experience. If you think
about who the average Facebook employee is, you'd realize that you probably
wouldn't want them to be in charge of designing a system meant to model the
intricacies of human interaction.

~~~
achompas
_Nothing good can come out of applying dumb algorithms (that is, any
algorithm) to a sufficiently rich "social graph"; it will always lead to
situations like that which are, at best, embarrassing, and at worst,
dangerous, for whoever is in the system._

What does this even mean? The "dumb algorithm" here will (a) take a user's
query and (b) search that user's friends and public profiles for hits on that
query. What's next: shouting about the robots taking over? Lamenting about how
we're all losing our humanity and man weren't things better back in the old
days?

I'm really disappointed this is the top comment on HN's top post. Users
identified by Graph Search have public accounts and have _willingly entered
personal information into Facebook._ We go thorough this song-and-dance every
year: FB updates security policies, everyone is up in arms, then -- gasp! --
everyone updates their security settings. Facebook has a clear transaction
with users: build a profile, get sold as eyeballs to advertisers. If you don't
like it, then quit.

"With great power comes great responsibility," indeed. People have received
numerous warnings about Facebook and privacy, and yet they've chosen to share
personal information with everyone they know. At this point the user is
responsible for choosing to participate or drop out. Meanwhile, every third HN
post includes a commenter, wagging their finger, reminding us in a nasally,
know-it-all voice that we're not the customer if we're not paying.

Is Graph Search really that shocking to you--to anyone on HN? Why the hell is
anyone up in arms about this in 2013, given what we know about social
networks?

~~~
derleth
> If you don't like it, then quit.

Assuming you're socially allowed to quit Facebook.

~~~
MortenK
Quitting Facebook is really not that big of a deal. You won't become a social
pariah, an outcast or loose all your friends because you cancel a website
account.

~~~
Nursie
You might well lose touch with a geographically diverse crowd of people. FB
and the like keep people involved in the minutiae of each others lives and
very much help keep _real_ friendships alive.

Of course FB is trying to destroy this as much as possible by controlling what
you see of what people post. Trying to decide what's important to me is
another facet of the 'dumb' algorithms the OP complains about.

~~~
Karunamon
>Of course FB is trying to destroy this as much as possible by controlling
what you see of what people post.

Because the alternative brings the wingnuts out. The more Facebook lets people
see, the more they get castigated for doing what the entire freaking purpose
of a social network site is!

~~~
Nursie
I know there have been a lot of issues about information leaking out because
of various security and privacy defaults being bad, but that's not what I
meant.

There seems to be some algorithm deciding what gets put into your stream by
weighting posts on who you most frequently interact with and how "important"
the news is, meaning that your fb experience turns more and more into a echo
chamber, and posts by people that don't post often seem to get lost.

Anyway, meh I say, meh!

------
msoad
> “Islamic men interested in men who live in Tehran, Iran“

This is funny, in Iran people don't quite understand what "interested in"
means. In sign up process when they see "interested in" options, they think
that means "are you interested in finding friends who are male?" (same for
females). This is because:

1\. People use VPN to access Facebook and Facebook can not
localize/internationalize their experience.

2\. Using translated Facebook sucks(at least translated in Farsi)

3\. Concept of homosexual relationships is not known by many iranians because
of lack of education.

So there is no wonder if people in Iran marking themself gay while they are
not.

(with all respect to gay people)

~~~
camus
Iranians perfectly know what is homosexuality and some practice it in secret ,
they are not dumb , they just dont talk about it for obvious reasons.

~~~
notahacker
Knowing what homosexuality is =/= assuming the purpose of an innocuous-
sounding phrase like "Interested in" is intended as a declaration of
homosexuality, especially if you're living in an environment where you can't
see why anyone would conceivably want to publicly declare it.

I suspect those least likely to select "interested in: men" are homosexually-
inclined Iranians who know exactly what it's for and wish they lived in an
environment where they could tick it.

~~~
camus
you are insulting them saying they cant even understand plain english, you
dont have to live in USA to understand what "interested in" mean in that
context , there is nothing innocent sounding in that expresssion, and i'm not
english nor have an english culture. Dont take aliens for fools.

~~~
notahacker
I'll give you a relevant example: Back in ~2006 it was possible to do similar
searches within your college.

A disproportionately large number of people declaring their interest in both
men and women were from China. Now it's _possible_ that Chinese students were
much more likely to be [openly] bisexual than British and European ones, but
every shred of evidence I've ever seen (at college, in the media and living in
a relatively-liberal ethnically Chinese country) points to the opposite.

~~~
oh_sigh
This is a problem of terminology. "Interested in" doesn't necessarily imply
"sexually attracted to".

Some people read "interested in" and put men and women, because they are
interested in being friends with men and women.

------
brianchu
Contrary to what a lot of people think, _you can change the visibility of
likes_. This affects Graph Search, Timeline visibility, and also page
visibility (I've personally tested these). The Admins of pages you like will
still be able to see that you like their page.

Go to the Likes page on your timeline. Click the Edit button in the upper
right. Privacy visibility buttons will pop up next to each Like category for
you to change the visibility of Likes. Make sure to scroll down to the bottom
so you don't miss the last category "Other Pages You Like."

Yes, Facebook intentionally doesn't do a good job of advertising this. For me,
though, I'm satisfied that the option is there (and that my option to stalk my
friends is there as well).

~~~
beatpanda
I appreciate the information, but this misses the point. Facebook hides
privacy settings because privacy is bad for their business objectives, and
most people will never bother to dig for these settings, leaving them open to
the kinds of attacks demonstrated by the original post.

~~~
hamax
> Facebook hides privacy settings

I have a direct link to privacy settings in the header. I don't know how can
they make it more visible.

~~~
beatpanda
Chart me a path from the privacy settings dialog in the header to changing the
visibility of individual "likes", such that the average user can prepare to
hide from random strangers when Open Graph Search goes public.

I dare you.

~~~
josteink
> Chart me a path from the privacy settings dialog in the header to changing
> the visibility of individual "likes",

And if he manages to do that, ask him to chart one which will be valid 2
months from now.

They keep changing that shit. Keeping up to speed is just a completely
overwhelming sort of task which even most people who care about privacy wont
have the stamina to do.

------
corporalagumbo
Maybe this seems horrible right now, but Facebook didn't create these problems
and contradictions, it just exposed them uncomfortably. I expect that the
eventual abuses springing from this exposure will spur a counterreaction,
hopefully with net-positive results. After all, what's the most meaningful
take-away from this? Is it that Facebook is endangering individuals? Not
really. Powerful, global social search tools like this were bound to happen
eventually. The potential benefits of integrative technologies like this are
just too great to ignore. No, the real take-away is this: sexual freedoms suck
in Iran. Religious freedoms suck in China. And lots of people have
embarrassing and/or contradictory and/or naive views and tastes.

So all this tells me is that we should focus on improving sexual freedoms in
Iran and religious freedoms in China. Hopefully the people with embarrassing
views will take care of themselves as tools such as this subject them to
increasing scrutiny.

~~~
flyinRyan
> Is it that Facebook is endangering individuals? Not really.

They most certainly are! Facebook keeps changing the rules of the game. There
is a reason why so many countries have Ex post facto law. Facebook, by
contract, ends up focusing on Ex post facto exploitation. Would people have
put in these likes on the same account had they known that FB would create a
search that would let anyone, anywhere do a simple query that exposes them in
some way?

~~~
Dirlewanger
>Would people have put in these likes on the same account had they known that
FB would create a search that would let anyone, anywhere do a simple query
that exposes them in some way?

I doubt they'd have given a shit, let's be honest.

~~~
flyinRyan
The majority, sure. But every time FB makes on of these changes some small
percentage of people decide they've had enough.

------
tlrobinson
Short term this may be a problem, but long term it's probably a good thing.
Hopefully once people become aware of what they're exposing they'll become
more cautious.

Complaining about News Feed and Graph Search is basically saying you're ok
with "security through obscurity". If I understand correctly, all of this
information is already available to those who want to dig deep enough.

~~~
troymc
While it's (probably) true that the information is already available, it's not
_easily_ available.

If it's going to take me 25 days of tedious profile reading to find people who
I seek (e.g. "Lesbian women from Greece who like Doritos"), I'm not going to
do it. It's not _practically_ available.

Graph Search changes that. Obscurity vanishes, along with any security it
provided.

~~~
Aissen
By 25 days of profile reading, I think you mean 2 days of writing a scraper
and 10 days of tuning it? The rest being spent letting it run, reading hacker
news, reddit, and your friends' facebook updates.

~~~
troymc
Facebook doesn't let any random bot crawl Facebook with scrapers. If you go
to:

<https://www.facebook.com/robots.txt>

it says:

# Notice: if you would like to crawl Facebook you can

# contact us here: <http://www.facebook.com/apps/site_scraping_tos.php>

# to apply for white listing. Our general terms are available

# at <http://www.facebook.com/apps/site_scraping_tos_terms.php>

(Then there's a bunch of "Disallow:" statements for Baidu, Google, etc.)

If you follow the link, you can apply to Facebook for permission to do
"automated data collection." Even if you do get permission, Facebook is very
restrictive with what you're allowed to do with the scraped data.

------
harlanlewis
Consider: “Family members of people who live in China and like Falun Gong”.

And: ”When users recognize or fear that their privacy or confidentiality is
compromised, true freedom of inquiry no longer exists.”

\- American Library Association,
[http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&...](http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=132904)

~~~
stephengillie
Where's the EFF Panopticlick for your FB likes? To tell you how well you stick
out or blend in with the crowd? (though blending in with the crowd is just
security through obscurity...)

A couple days ago someone was asking for an automated FB deliker app/service,
to automatically unlike everything you've _like_ d on FB.

~~~
klinquist
Best to just set it up so "Only you" can see your own likes.

<http://abrax.us/Facebook/EditLikes.php>

~~~
Aloisius
Will that prevent your family showing up when they search for family members
who like something? Or just prevent you from showing up with your own likes
visible?

------
______
It's ironic -- the "anonymization" technique of pixelating the image and
blanking the names doesn't really work anymore: one can easily just search by
the other attributes to find the people again, there is enough entropy in that
data.

~~~
notatoad
The whole point of the site (other than lulz) is to highlight the privacy
problems of Facebook, they obviously aren't going to completely protect the
people who show up in those searches. What the blurring does is prevents the
top 3-4 people in the results at the time of the search from being unfairly
highlighted, and it doesn't keep any historical record of the people should
they take steps to remove themselves from these results.

I think the anonymization, while not perfect, is enough to be considered
ethical.

------
mcphilip
I'm willing to bet that APIs will eventually expose searching the text of
posts, not just "Likes". Sure, it'll be introduced with examples of better
ways to find people with common interests, but inevitably it'll expose even
privacy protected posts to bad actors (e.g. Big Brother Police State, Ad
companies who pay a premium, etc).

Is anyone willing to argue that in the future it won't be possible to query
something like "find recently single women who are bipolar (i.e. frequent
dramatic changes of mood/tone in wall status posts), high school dropouts,
without a living father, and are easily impressed by nice cars"

The sad thing is that all the data are already in FB databases to answer
queries like the above. All that's preventing mining that data is ever
changing ToCs and government laws.

~~~
beatpanda
The notion that the government doesn't already have access to all that data is
absurd. Facebook has shown an eagerness to cooperate with governments and law
enforcement in the past and I would be extremely surprised to learn that
they're not already selling or giving away data to government for large-scale
data mining operations.

------
electic
This is bad news all around. It is likely a huge percentage of searches
performed by people will not enrich lives but most people will use it to mine
out insights that others don't wish to be publicized.

Can you imagine people being rounded up in China over this and put into
prisons over their "like".

~~~
unreal37
They don't have Facebook in the Great Firewall of China.

And if they DID, people there wouldn't be liking Falun Gong. It's a bogus
example.

~~~
leoc
> It's a bogus example.

Is it, though? The search mentions a user who liked the Falun Gong branch in
[a European city - they could probably anonymise this one a bit more]. I'm
guessing there are a fairly large number of people who leave China to study or
work, join Facebook while abroad, then return to the PRC at some point.

------
aaronbrethorst
Apple Inc Employees Who Like Android:
[https://www.facebook.com/search/103818329656399/likers/13794...](https://www.facebook.com/search/103818329656399/likers/137947732957611/employees/intersect)

People who like Barack Obama and Mitt Romney:
[https://www.facebook.com/search/6815841748/likers/2139280112...](https://www.facebook.com/search/6815841748/likers/21392801120/likers/intersect)

People who like MPAA and The Pirate Bay:
[https://www.facebook.com/search/108476252505746/likers/11101...](https://www.facebook.com/search/108476252505746/likers/111011882256402/likers/intersect)

~~~
mseebach
The semantics of "like", especially in the context where you "like" an
organisation, has changed to "follows" or "subscribes to".

------
artmageddon
I don't know if it's enough, but I just removed nearly any interest that I
liked "i.e. removed snowboarding, hip-hop', etc. along with other stuff that's
just promotional fluff. I may not be able to avoid the social graph altogether
but I'd like to limit the kind of searches I appear in.

------
aviswanathan
Maybe it's just me, but the FB Graph Search intro video seemed to be more of
an objective-based searching tool. I (probably stupidly) assumed it could
serve as a sidekick to Google search. Forgot that the majority of Facebook
users use the default search to find (stalk) other people, and this is just an
engine to do it more efficiently. I'm starting to be a bit wary about the
monetization potential of FB Graph Search.

------
MrMan
I am scared to death of FaceBook and Graph Search is the last straw I am
immediately deactivating my account.

~~~
crowhack
Just did the same. I've had enough of being used.

~~~
onedev
You realize graph search only utilizes information that YOU make available.

Why did you make that data available? Do you not want others to see it? If you
didn't, then why did you put it out there for others to see?

Also, you know that privacy controls are taken into account right? So if you
don't make certain data available to certain people, you don't show up in
searches for those people....

I think you're being a bit irrational when you say that you're "being used".

~~~
crowhack
Yes I do but when I joined facebook I didn't realize they would create a super
search engine to easily sort and categorize all of their users' data for more
efficient targeted advertising. They sell likes, they have my friends sponsor
ads they've never sponsored, they used 5 of my friends pictures to try to
manipulate me into not deleting my account. We aren't their main customer but
are there just to be targeted. Sounds like we are being used.

This graph search is just the last straw. It is terrifying the repercussions
this search engine could have, and I believe this blog post shows some great
examples.

~~~
Mahn
So you are arguing that you made something public on facebook, but you didn't
expect it to be _that_ public? It looks like people who reject/don't use
facebook due to privacy concerns do so because they don't understand the
implications of what they put there. Personally, if I were to be concerned
about privacy, I'd just make some research to understand what is and isn't
public and how to use the product overall, but I suppose one could be pissed
off at facebook for not being clearer about who can or could see what you put
in there (even though they constantly try to improve this). Either way, the
argument "I don't use facebook because I'm concerned about the data they
extract from me" is flawed and irrational, because facebook won't know
anything you don't explicitly tell to it. I still hear that argument from some
people every now and then and I can't help but think that they just don't
understand and did not want to make an effort in understanding facebook.

~~~
crowhack
My 'irrational' fear exists because of facebook's constantly changing uses of
our data. When they began and we all started liking things we didn't know
these same likes would be used for marketing purposes. We didn't know they
would be used to sponsor ads. They went from a social network for people to a
social network for companies. I agree with you and I do understand that I
choose what is public, yes that's great; but how about the average user?
Facebook makes money by selling it's users' data to companies. If everyone was
private they wouldn't make any money.

This open graph search will be great for marketing purposes, and a silly tool
for us users. I guarantee there are going to be some serious consequences of
companies/governments having the power to instantly search and sort billion's
of users' data. And maybe you'll say that some great findings can come from
this search; maybe we can learn more about humans and societies with this
tool? Maybe, but I believe the cost outweighs the benefits.

------
Apocryphon
I see this as similar to those shady websites that scrape for personal
information, then aggregate them. Not the shadiness, but the same principle of
gathering information that has already been available, but now simply exposing
it in one neat package. And it's very frightening. Can you imagine in a few
years where scrapers can take this kind of logic and build databases of
people's "online footprints" based on aliases they have used in the past by
searching for references to emails they registered with, or mentioned in
comments? Add textual analysis of their comments, and all bets are off.

~~~
achompas
Those "online footprint" type of websites already exist, and they're very
popular with due diligence firms.

~~~
Apocryphon
Do they actually go as far as log aliases and pseudonyms? People often reuse
screen names more than they do passwords.

~~~
aw3c2
yes, that was exposed a couple of weeks ago. I cannot remember any searchable
terms from the post or I would link.

------
return0
The searches depicted are more telling about the person making the search
rather than the supposed "victims". Nothing to see here, unless you buy into
stereotypical fearmongering or are "shocked" that humans are human.

~~~
kevingadd
You don't seem to understand the power information has over people's lives.
Have you ever disclosed information to some of your friends that you wouldn't
disclose to the general public? What about information that could get you
arrested or executed? This is real.

~~~
return0
A real dangerous person cannot be so dumb, by definition. This is just
sensationalism.

------
rdl
People "who work at technology companies" and "like destroying billions of
dollars in FB market capitalization". :)

------
acchow
So it turns out Graph Search is not at all what I thought it was. I thought it
would infer information about people that they did not explicitly type in
(inferred semantics) to complete my search. In actuality, it looks like a GUI
for SQL.

------
dmcy22
At first glance, it almost seems as if they turned the various segmenting
functions in Facebook ads into Graph Search. Except you can now see in much
more detail who those people actually are.

------
VeejayRampay
Combine the extremely creepy Graph Search and
[http://readwrite.com/2012/12/11/why-are-dead-people-
liking-s...](http://readwrite.com/2012/12/11/why-are-dead-people-liking-stuff-
on-facebook) and you've got yourself a pretty interesting situation. The
possibilities for ruining people's lives are just endless.

------
psbp
Goodbye Facebook.

~~~
corporalagumbo
Haven't heard that one before...

~~~
rogerchucker
You need to take a break from your Facebook apologism. It's getting
cartoonish.

~~~
corporalagumbo
If you say so.

------
elorant
I wonder guys working at Facebood don't realize that a service like that may
end in their demise? If people begin to understand that the activity they're
declaring online can be used against them, or to put it mildly to identify
them in ways they might not want, they will stop using the damn site.

------
miw-sec-work
If this isn't a good enough reason to GET THE HELL OFF FACEBOOK then you wont
be convinced otherwise.

GET THE HELL OFF FACEBOOK!

~~~
veb
or simply change your habits online. there's absolutely no need to have "I
like to get drunk and party" on your Facebook page if you're worried that
people will see that.

------
bane
I think it's obvious that this is really a way of advertising FB's advertising
possibilities, opening it up to the general public is a side-effect of
building revenue generation tools.

But FB will definitely have to roll a great deal of this back as this is
definitely deeply troubling.

~~~
m22
If they don't roll it back then this will simply encourage users to bump up
their privacy, or even remove their details from their profiles.

------
sideproject
Not sure what would happen in the long term, but at least in the short term, I
can see a lot of people start removing their personal data from Facebook when
this gets released...

~~~
ElissaShevinsky
This is a headache to do (could someone build an app to make this easier?) but
I'm putting this into my personal task list for next week.

------
fossuser
This doesn't change much, the established facebook brand and etiquette is that
it's used to communicate with friends. This is also the situation that Mark
said they're targeting in his startup talk a few months ago.

It isn't currently a place to reach out or meet new people.

Because of this people will (currently) be hostile to messages from people
they don't know. So while you can find interesting things and actually have a
search that works now - it probably won't change behavior that much.

It is pretty cool though.

------
matthew-wegner
You've always been able to target people like this via their advertising
tools. Want to sell the Cookie Diet to single women, 35-45, who like "Dieting"
and "Oreo's"?

------
lukev
I don't use facebook myself (have an account, but never touch it) so I'm a bit
confused about one thing.

Who would actually, seriously "like" something like Prostitutes or Racism? It
seems that fields like that would have literally no serious responses, beyond
a bunch of frat boys goofing around.

Or is that the only expectation for searches like this anyway?

~~~
mark_integerdsv
Personally, I don't doubt that people with questionable shared interests have
made contact with one another through FB.

World's a weird place at times. The Internet kind of dilates the portal into
those spaces.

------
ohwp
This only shows a lot of people take data without context as "truth".

Example: I might work for a charity related to prostitutes. So ofcourse there
is a possibility that I "like" something that has to do with prostitutes.

I think lack of context is what's most dangerous these days.

~~~
Buzaga
everyone judges.. if potential employees, bullies, potential clients find the
guy in something like this there's damage already...

------
BigBalli
You can find a good collection of related links here:
[http://giacomoballi.com/2013/01/everything-you-need-to-
know-...](http://giacomoballi.com/2013/01/everything-you-need-to-know-about-
facebook-graph-search/)

------
some23
There are a lot of nonsensical suggestions

[http://codingplayground.blogspot.it/2013/01/facebook-
graph-s...](http://codingplayground.blogspot.it/2013/01/facebook-graph-search-
and-synthetic.html)

------
JimWillTri
It's a good thing I always used alias' with Facebook.

~~~
notatoad
If they ever catch you at that, they'll delete your account. And they will
quiz your friends to find out if your name is real or not:
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/09/24/facebook-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/09/24/facebook-
stops-asking-users-to-snitch-on-friends-with-fake-names/)

------
angersock
Well, the consumers wanted it, right?

Props to giving the people what they want!

(also for having such wonderful inventory management!)

~~~
maaku
I didn't ask for it.

~~~
flyinRyan
The consumers would be those who pay money: i.e. advertisers.

~~~
angersock
Hence my comment about inventory management. Moooooo.

------
abava
answers depend on the accuracy in users profiles. Btw, you can try this simple
search in your social circle: <http://servletsuite.com/fbdir>

------
veb
I wonder how many of these would be a joke though...

------
lubos
looking at these graph searches, now I finally understand why Zuckerberg
called his users "dumb fucks"

------
clobber
Creepy doesn't begin to describe facebook anymore.

------
rogerchucker
Just realized that Graph Search is a great tool to aggregate homosexuals in
any area - "Men who live nearby and are interested in men" (or replace "men"
with "women"). Great tool for taking homophobia to a whole new level. One can
of course argue that liberal groups can use this information for an opposite
purpose.

~~~
drivebyacct2
This is sort of a weird assumption to leap too. Would "People who like the
page Black People" also be targeted? Would Republicans target people who are
marked as "liberal"? Or maybe I'm overly optimistic about homophobic people
being either dumb enough or unmotivated enough to do such a thing.

Heh, if anything, I'm more worried about it bringing back a resurgence of
random messages from people who found me through the old search which allowed
you to search by these characteristics. A less reputable part of me would find
it interesting to find other people who share interests with me and are gay in
my area... I'm currently in the Midwest with a limited number of dating
options.

~~~
tommorris
Finally, a way to find single gay dudes who dig MongoDB... ;-)

------
rogerchucker
And oh.. you want some potential cheating women (or men)? Try "Married women
who like Ashley Madison"... ;)

~~~
ElissaShevinsky
We need to be careful not to read too much into this data without context.
"Liking" a fan page used to be a much lighter thing before the FB interest
graph became interwoven into other applications & this new search feature.

I used to "like" friends fan pages without much thought, if they asked me to.
Re: Ashley Madison, there are married people who work there and will choose to
"like" their employer. This represents a small number of users, but is meant
to show that there are legitimate use cases.

~~~
rogerchucker
Not sure if you tried the search string. "More than 100 people" were returned
on this and most of them in the top results were indeed employed elsewhere.

------
rogerchucker
This sorta proves what I have been saying about Graph Search. Its biggest and
most prominent use cases will be fancy but useless searches of people.
Unfortunately some of those searches will lead to new headaches.

------
dhruvbhatia
Can't read the entire search phrase on an iPhone. Please consider using text
wrapping.

