"Sugar Babies" and "Arrangements"

[BrownSugaTwo]

Succulent sweetheart is still around. A new profile now. She gained some weight. But she is available.

Does anyone have a pic or a link to her new profile? Sounds familiar; I think I may have seen her before.

[Peter Johnson]

'Corrective action' is deleting social media and not having your pictures and personal information all over the internet. This shit is going to get worse, much worse, and social media is made for women not dudes. Life improves when you delete all that trash..

No, social media is not made only for women, and nor is it all trash. I don't use LinkedIn, and the only social media site with my real identity is Facebook. And it serves a good purpose, to help me keep in touch with family and friends all over the world, as well as participate in different groups and communities, like hiking, collectibles, etc. Sure, if you only use FB to stalk your ex-gf, then it isn't useful or healthy, but for those of us who are a bit more multi-faceted, it works great.

And actually, what do you think USAG is? This is social media as well, to a large extent. Just like Twitter or Instagram or Reddit, where you don't have to use your real name.

[Member #6704]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think SucculentSweetheart is a woman I saw several times about three years ago. Her body was smoking hot. She had curvy hips and nice tits but wasn't fat at all. She was really tight for both vaginal and anal. She didn't really like to kiss, which is the main reason why I stopped seeing her. She seemed disinterested when I was DATY, so I only did it once and didn't keep at it for very long. I really can't be certain it's the same woman because I don't have any old pictures of her to compare. But your comment about her not liking DATY makes me think it's her. She didn't host. She always drove to my hotel room.

Succulent sweetheart is still around. A new profile now. She gained some weight. But she is available.

[NewAnonymousName]

'Corrective action' is deleting social media and not having your pictures and personal information all over the internet. This shit is going to get worse, much worse, and social media is made for women not dudes. Life improves when you delete all that trash.

There's no reason to even have your picture on LinkedIn, and certainly not having it visible to everyone. Masking pictures is a temporary fix to a permanent problem and it won't be effective for very long.

This isn't accurate for many professions. Service professionals (doctors, lawyers, consultants, accountants, etc.) are typically required by their firms to have pictures with names and bios on practice or company webpages. Many executive teams are required by their companies to do the same. LinkedIn bios with pictures are often a valuable tool to make connections for sales prospects or for potential job changes.

On the bright side, many of these professions pay well enough that we can “simp” by overpaying to outbid some of you when we want to close a deal with a hot young sugar baby. (Just kidding. Sort of.)

[PrinceOfFools]

Thanks for the info. I suppose we are all screwed in some capacity. All we can do is take corrective action going forward.

'Corrective action' is deleting social media and not having your pictures and personal information all over the internet. This shit is going to get worse, much worse, and social media is made for women not dudes. Life improves when you delete all that trash.

There's no reason to even have your picture on LinkedIn, and certainly not having it visible to everyone. Masking pictures is a temporary fix to a permanent problem and it won't be effective for very long.

[LouisHernandez]

This is incorrect. Running a cloaked picture through pimeyes will still find matches to uncloaked pictures that are already out there on the web. Fawkes' website specifically says that this won't protect you. I've tried it. I ran a cloaked picture through pimeyes and it still found the matches to my uncloaked work pictures that were already out there.

Cloaking only works consistently if you cloak all of the pictures out there on the web that pimeyes uses to build a database on you. It usually will not work if you merely cloak the picture that you share with a SB.

Thanks for the info. I suppose we are all screwed in some capacity. All we can do is take corrective action going forward.

[LouisHernandez]

Oh yeah, that sounds like the rational course of action, and not sure why I didn't think of it. I should certainly do this with my main FB pics and maybe delete some of the other ones on there, although if other people have me tagged, won't help much there. I have that meetup.com acct that I may just delete and start from scratch with a cloaked pic. I haven't even gone an event in years. And definitely going to opt out of any photos, on group hikes or similar.

Changing the main profile pics on FB et al. Will do most of the work, if you keep the rest of your social media profile private. I updated all my main pics yesterday. Of course it takes a while to propagate thru the system. Going forward make sure all public facing photos are cloaked.

[Peter Johnson]

Cloaking only works consistently if you cloak all of the pictures out there on the web that pimeyes uses to build a database on you. It usually will not work if you merely cloak the picture that you share with a SB.

I will have to submit a takedown request for both facecheck and pimeyes, as well. I wonder how much of your DL do they really need? I'm going to black out a lot of it.

And there are these sites, but are there others out there? And certainly will be many more in the future. Going to be a game of whack-a-mole, but just the way it is.

[NewAnonymousName]

I've done the same as you. So it sounds like cloaked pics can never be matched with other pics. That's good enough for me.

This is incorrect. Running a cloaked picture through pimeyes will still find matches to uncloaked pictures that are already out there on the web. Fawkes' website specifically says that this won't protect you. I've tried it. I ran a cloaked picture through pimeyes and it still found the matches to my uncloaked work pictures that were already out there.

Cloaking only works consistently if you cloak all of the pictures out there on the web that pimeyes uses to build a database on you. It usually will not work if you merely cloak the picture that you share with a SB.

[Peter Johnson]

Even before I swapped my social pics with cloaked ones, when I did a search using a cloaked pic it wasn't able to find me. I also filled out the form on pimeyes to not track / index my face and that was pretty painless. I haven't done that with any of the other sites, but I probably will.

The only thing I did with my social media pics is to change my profile pic for google, facebook and linked-in to cloaked images.

Oh yeah, that sounds like the rational course of action, and not sure why I didn't think of it. I should certainly do this with my main FB pics and maybe delete some of the other ones on there, although if other people have me tagged, won't help much there. I have that meetup.com acct that I may just delete and start from scratch with a cloaked pic. I haven't even gone an event in years. And definitely going to opt out of any photos, on group hikes or similar.

[FarFarAway]

Well try this:. Upload your cloaked pic to facecheck-id and see if you still get matched.

You need to read the Fawkes site. The purpose of cloaking is to prevent the sites from building a model of your face that they can then use to search the internet. Nothing more.

[LouisHernandez]

Even before I swapped my social pics with cloaked ones, when I did a search using a cloaked pic it wasn't able to find me. I also filled out the form on pimeyes to not track / index my face and that was pretty painless. I haven't done that with any of the other sites, but I probably will.

Edit:
I just checked again on facecheck.id with two cloaked images and neither could find me. The only thing I did with my social media pics is to change my profile pic for google, facebook and linked-in to cloaked images. I didn't do every pic I've ever uploaded, but I also keep Facebook set to only friends and I'm not all that active on any site. It's definitely a risk, but I have been burned by girls getting really upset about being catfished so I will generally send a real pic unless the person has given me a reason to be warry of them.

I've done the same as you. So it sounds like cloaked pics can never be matched with other pics. That's good enough for me.

[LouisHernandez]

Too late for that, unfortunately. This brave new world certainly has its drawbacks.

I uploaded the pics I sent out to girls, to facecheck.id and it came back with my Meetup.com profile that I must have made 15 years ago, and for some stupid reason, put my real name on it. I changed it now, but not sure how much that helps.

Well try this:. Upload your cloaked pic to facecheck-id and see if you still get matched.

[FarFarAway]

Could you give a "cloaked picture" definition or how to do it?

Search for a site at the University of Chicago called "Fawkes". They have a tool that you can run any photo through. It prevents that photo from being used to develop a facial recognition map for searching the internet for your other photos. It needs to apply to as many of your photos that are 'out there' to prevent pimeyes, etc. , from using yet another picture that you may have supplied to a POT (even if it has never ever been on the internet) as the basis to search out your real identity.

I have posted a lot on this over time, search my handle. I have also gone through the process w / the two main site and asked them to exclude me from search results. That can be done w / out having any sort of paid membership. I cannot be located through them at this time. However, we will just have to stay alert, as new sites pop up, we'll have to do the same with each and every one of them if we want SBs not to be able to identify us IRL through facial recognition.

[TylerDurden07]

https://members.seeking.com/member/3...8-835e0f77771d

This one wants you to send $150 "so I know I can trust you" & then she'll schedule a meetup. Offered to meet for coffee or maybe lunch, but she had to have that $150 first. Actually had a lot of messages with her about all this, but in the end she could provide no explanation on what mutual benefit I get for doing that.

I have also been talking to atlgagirl today. She's been unfavorably mentioned here before due to GPS. I never got that far today. As I usually do, once we switched to text, I blocked her on the site (hence why I didn't put up a link). Boy, did that get her fired up. She said "eliminating means of communication is a control tactic. " Oh. Ok. I smell a big rat with her. So, what I've learned is that--whether or not she's major GPS--she's a lunatic. Avoid like the plague.