Worst fallout from the Ashley Madison breach(es)?
Displaying poll results.20579 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8470 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 6386 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 20 comments
Missing option (Score:5, Funny)
"Is Ashley Madison Coboyneal's wife?"
Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not surprised. A website with no moral compass will not act morally. I just feel sorry for the kids that will be affected by this.
As for getting new users, I'm guessing that these new users feel that the site should now be more secure now that it has been compromised.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
A website with no moral compass will not act morally.
Please. I don't think there's very much that is immoral about taking money from people who want to give it to you.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why most /.ers are single...
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Please. I don't think there's very much that is immoral about taking money from people who want to give it to you.
Oh, I think I see the reason your'e confused here. They weren't just taking money from people who wanted to give it to them, they were actually providing an immoral service to immoral users in exchange for money. You probably should have learned more about the conversation before commenting.
You are confused here. Many persons do not consider their service immoral. Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Funny)
Please. I don't think there's very much that is immoral about taking money from people who want to give it to you.
Oh, I think I see the reason your'e confused here. They weren't just taking money from people who wanted to give it to them, they were actually providing an immoral service to immoral users in exchange for money. You probably should have learned more about the conversation before commenting.
You are confused here. Many persons do not consider their service immoral. Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
Whose morality should I impose on others, then?
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or to put it in a more graphic picture: It is totally ok to have a penis (half of the world population has one), it is absolutely ok to change your pants from time to time, and it's a pure necessity to put your pants down to do so. Nevertheless it's still embarrassing for most of us to be caught pants down and having our wang being stared at by lots of bystanders.
Second: As far as I know, it never said in the Terms and Conditions of Ashley Madison that you have to be in a relationship based on respective sexual faithfulness to be entitled to use the service. Thus all you can tell about the people registered with Ashley Madison is that with a high probability they once were looking for sexual encounters. Thus the argument that people who committed suicide because of the breach of Ashley Madison had it coming to them amounts to the idea that searching for a sexual encounter should be punishable by death. For a short time I was cherishing the thought of what if this was true for people with this world view and I smirked because it implied that people with this morality compass would be forbidden to procreate.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus all you can tell about the people registered with Ashley Madison is that with a high probability they once were looking for sexual encounters.
False. That might be true if Ashley Madison were the only dating site available. It isn't. That introduces the element of choice. These users chose to use a site intended specifically for cheaters. That means that they chose to use an environment which contains mostly cheaters, which means they'd be having sex with mostly cheaters, which means at best that they'd mostly be assisting other people with breaking their agreements with their partners. So at best these people have deliberately chosen to participate in an environment which encourages unethical acts, and to promote them themselves; both with their presence, and their money. Therefore we know that these people are disingenuous and deceptive, and don't care who they affect. Anyone who gives Ashley Madison money is scum by association, and I have no sympathy for the fact that they are associated with the site being found out. You reap what you sow.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Say I'm a dude who likes banging housewives. I'm single, don't give a flying fuck if my membership is exposed.
Say I use the website to bang some housewives, and then meet the love of my life, get married and have a couple kids. I never use the service since meeting the love of my life.
Few years go by, the data breach exposes me as someone who used that service. My wife leaves me, my kids hate me, my co-workers ostracize me. Have I done something wrong? Maybe, if banging some housewives while single is wrong. Point is, trust is shattered today over something from the past which is irrelevant today.
Maybe I even had told my wife "hey, before meeting you I used to bag housewives" and she was okay with it at the time, but perceptions can change drastically based on information that one would understand emotionally rather than logically.
Hell, before meeting my wife I was rather promiscuous, but people change. Bringing out the skeletons in the closet helps nobody.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Funny)
Say I'm a dude who likes banging housewives.
OK, you're a dude who likes banging housewives. I suggest you join a swinger's club. Put yourself online with an ad saying "I wanna fuck your wife".
Few years go by, the data breach exposes me as someone who used that service. My wife leaves me, my kids hate me, my co-workers ostracize me. Have I done something wrong?
Yeah, you married a bitch who's too dumb to look at the dates on the records.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
if banging some housewives while single is wrong
Yes its wrong unless its your wife OR her husband is fully aware and agreed to it.
Marriage is a contract, one with certain implied conditions unless otherwise specified. One of those is fidelity. Marriage is also a huge investment by both parties in terms of time and often money and property. If infidelity would make the marriage arrangement unacceptable to a party if they knew and that information is kept from them they are being induced to act against their interest continuing to invest. Put that way
Re: (Score:3)
Do you even quote bro?
Re: (Score:3)
Few years go by, the data breach exposes me as someone who used that service. My wife leaves me, my kids hate me, my co-workers ostracize me. Have I done something wrong? Maybe, if banging some housewives while single is wrong. Point is, trust is shattered today over something from the past which is irrelevant today.
Actions, meet consequences. Just because your moral compass changed doesn't mean that the consequences of past actions based on previous morals... don't.
On a more personal level, maybe you should have brought this up with your wife *before* you got married?
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Marriage is a contract
Unless the country has further sought to legislate marriage in ways I'm not aware of, I'm pretty sure that I am not a party to anyone else's marriage contract. I'm not breaking any contract.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:4, Insightful)
Holy hell, talk about emotion instead of logic. She's a "dumb bitch" now, huh? And you've decided that your moral compass is correct and that you want to push it on everyone? How about you fuck off instead.
Oh, so now it's your moral compass that is correct?
I don't like anything about Ashley Madison or its users in general, although I know that they are still actual people, many of whom I would probably get along with in real life and I'm not going to sit here and cast my judgment over them like I understand the situation that they're in and why they're doing what they're doing.
It's because they lack a spine. They're too cowardly to be honest. Their parents did a shit job.
I don't like the company running the site and I don't like assholes or narcissists, but I'm not going to sit here and judge everyone who uses that site like I know them.
Look, it's very fucking simple. Everyone who used it is either morally bankrupt because they're a cheater or because they were willing to promote cheating, which is what happens with you give your money to a business which promotes cheating; or an idiot, because they didn't know what they were doing, because they can't fucking read. But actually, nearly nobody is in the second category here, because they have to be able to read to use the site.
If you condone people lying to the people who should most be able to trust them, fuck you sideways, fuck you twice, and I can see why you would become a lawyer. You've got sleaze for blood.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:4, Insightful)
Contrary to most males, I don't think I should be the one stopping her from pursuing happiness. As a grown-up, it's her choice. Now, before you ask me for her phone number, please note that she's not particularly beautiful, not young anymore, she's nagging and has deep Christian beliefs which condemn adultery. :)
Good luck
Re: Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You realize that "morality" encompasses things like "people shouldn't kill each other" and not just restrictions on sex, etc? You think nobody should enforce any kind of rules against anything at all, and we should just let people kill other people if they (the killers) feel that that is morally OK?
Re: Judging by the story so far... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Whose morality should I impose on others, then?
That's easy.... THEIRS... You impose a person's own moral code on them, within the bounds of the law.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Morality is set by society. It is still considered immoral to cheat on your spouse. You know, the person you swore to be true to. Lying and cheating are still considered by most people to be bad things. You may feel that it's okay to cheat on your family and lie to them but the rest of us consider you a piece of shit if you get caught.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
. . . but the rest of us consider you a piece of shit if you get caught.
Actually, if you lie to and cheat on your family, you're a piece of shit even if you never get caught. If you don't feel like you are, then you'er a sociopathic piece of shit.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Informative)
It all depends on your definition of trust, cheating and lies.
For example, I've always been here for my fiancée. She was very ill (severe postpartum psychosis) during 2+ years, and many people told me they were amazed that I would still stay with her. That's the most basic definition of trust to me : she needed me, so I stayed and she knew she could count on me, no questions asked.
On the other hand, I occasionally (twice in 6 years) spent the night with attractive girls that I'll never see again.
I fail to see how it means I cheat on my family, or how it should affect their trust in any way.
I'll always do my best to be there for them.
And it would be moronic to let those 2 nights destroy our years-long relationship, that, even with a long illness, has been f**in great.
Fun fact : My gf once confessed that she cheated on me. I was relieved, and told her "me too". We acknowledged that it can happen, that it's not so big a deal, and we should try to keep extramarital affairs to a minimum.
Best regards from a sociopathic piece of shit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If it's not immoral, why the secrecy and discreetness?
Seriously?
I'll make an ass out of myself here, for illustrative purposes.
I assume you have a bank account. I assume you don't consider having one immoral.... So why all the secrecy and discreetness with your account number, pin code, balance, transaction records, etc?
Short Version: secrecy + discreetness !== immorality
Re: (Score:2)
Membership of that website contains something that many people wish to know, so that they take advantage of you, either by blackmailing you or ostracizing you.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:4)
If Ashley Madison is still around after all this, I might actually create an account however, as I believe I could find a vertical in there to suit me: Married women in open relationships - they're fun, strings free, and there's no lying or secrecy required. And if I did, then I'd have no problems being open about it. Nothing shameful in enjoying some naked time with a consenting adult. As for shouting it from the rooftops, that'd just make me feel like Andy Samberg making an SNL digital short (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQlIhraqL7o) which might be fun, but probably atypical.
People have a right to keep whatever personal information they damn well please to themselves. Again, this doesn't make it immoral. And again, judging a stranger with your morality is the core of intolerance.
Re:Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
You are confused here. Many persons do not consider their service immoral. Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
You have to tell me who thinks breaking your word and destroying intimate trust isn't immoral. I doubt even very many of the site's users would make the claim what they were doing was moral. At best, they might make excuses for why they needed to.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people are amoral, and there are even those who could reasonably be called anti-moral. The most obvious example of the "breaking your word and destroying intimate trust isn't immoral" type of person is Bill Clinton.
Generally, any sociopath discards morality.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a surprisingly large percentage of swingers on sites like this.
There are better sites for those people.
However, they may not want their extended family (parents, siblings, adult children, etc.) or friends, neighbors, or employers to know about their lifestyle.
Until their neighbor, family, adult children, employers etc decide to cheat on their spouses and bump into so-and-so... a secret is best kept to oneself. If one must share it then with as few people as possible, knowing that each additional person who knows increases the odds of the secret getting out.
It follows then, that a person wishing to preserve a secret shouldn't post it on a website with millions of other users... especially since absolutely anyone with enough money to afford lunch at at FastFood restaurant can join...
Nothing wrong with that.
Morally wrong with that? You are correct. Its still catastrophically stupid.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Many persons do not consider their service immoral.
I do not know any of those persons. Simply, if it is not immoral then why does it need to be secret?
Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
Considering you to be immoral is not the same as imposing morality on you.
Re: (Score:3)
Many persons do not consider their service immoral.
I do not know any of those persons. Simply, if it is not immoral then why does it need to be secret?
Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
Considering you to be immoral is not the same as imposing morality on you.
Hmm... AshleyMadison.com is no big secret. I don't own a TV, yet I've still seen the commercial a few times here and there.
Why are half the posts on here conflating secrecy with immorality? You're all fine with keeping your (lets assume completely 'moral') email, bank details, salary, intellectual property, etc, etc secret without the presumption being "because it must be immoral" right?
On the other hand, sure, you can call anyone you like immoral, so long as you're OK with that person rejecting your a
Re: (Score:2)
Why are half the posts on here conflating secrecy with immorality? You're all fine with keeping your (lets assume completely 'moral') email, bank details, salary, intellectual property, etc, etc secret without the presumption being "because it must be immoral" right?
You appear to be confused. As usual, the devil is in the details.
No one cares if everyone knows they have an account at Bank of America, but they don't want their account number revealed.
No one cares if everybody knows they have a gmail account, but they don't want their password revealed.
But no one wants everyone to know they have an AshleyMadison account, even if their authentication details are kept secret.
Please don't be so obtuse as to claim you don't see the distinction.
Re: (Score:3)
If you have to keep a secret from your partner, they're not your partner.
Police officers are all fucked. Their wives and husbands are not their partners.
If you ever had jury duty, you lost your partner. 'cause, you know, you're not allowed to give details about it to anyone.
If you ever worked in security, you also lost your partner.
Or if you ever signed an NDA... or if you're in FBI, CIA, NSA, most parts of the government...
DAMN!
So many people without a partner out there!
Re: (Score:2)
DAMN!
So many people without a partner out there!
Damn, so many pieces of shit who cheat on their partners that have to come up with disingenuous arguments to justify their pathetic existences, because they would otherwise just fucking kill themselves.
It was obvious what I meant by "partner", and only someone desperately looking for an excuse for their inexcusable activities would deliberately mistake that. Just admit that you need to work on your level of integrity, and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
I do not know any of those persons. Simply, if it is not immoral then why does it need to be secret?
There's a plethora of morel things that you do and keep secret, or at least private. Shopping habits, for example. You don't want your shopping habits to be tracked, you don't want Windows 10 to phone home about this and that info which reside on your PC. Why is that so?
Because it gives random people power over you.
That's why certain activities need to be kept private (not secret, it's said it's not a secret if two people know about it). The website is a facilitator of private activities. Some consider said
Re: (Score:2)
I myself have an account created on an escort-related forum, solely for reading other people's stories. I never used the service and I don't plan on doing so, but it was the only way to read the stories posted there. Now, that forum might get hacked, my account might be exposed and my wife might leave me for something I haven't done but she would think I did. Would that be fair?
This problem can be solved by the simple method of telling your wife that you have such an account.
I personally would never cheat on my wife, however I have no problem with a friend cheating on his wife. It's his problem and I won't think less of him for engaging in extramarital sex. To me, it's like smoking.
If you don't care whether your friend violates the trust of the person he's supposed to be closest to, that's your decision. But most people would consider that an extremely low standard. Would you care if he lied to you?
(If his wife knows about it and is okay with it, that's different. But it doesn't sound like that's what you're talking about.)
Re: (Score:2)
I myself have an account created on an escort-related forum, solely for reading other people's stories. I never used the service and I don't plan on doing so, but it was the only way to read the stories posted there. Now, that forum might get hacked, my account might be exposed and my wife might leave me for something I haven't done but she would think I did. Would that be fair?
This problem can be solved by the simple method of telling your wife that you have such an account.
People will want to keep their membership a secret because society (and most people on slashdot) will want to impose their morality and consider their membership immoral.
It is identical to the situation not too many years ago where people had to keep their homosexuality secret because otherwise everyone would consider them to be an immoral person.
Re: (Score:2)
You are confused here. Many persons do not consider their service immoral. Please don't try and impose your morality onto others.
Serious question for you here......is there anything that is immoral then?
Re: (Score:2)
I think there is an important, moral issue here: the fact that the owners of the service entice their customers into using a service that can have grave, social implications, without offering adequate protection and clearly without giving a flying f*ck about what it does to their customers or their families.
It may be true that "The users should have thought about the potential consequences before having an affair", as some will say - but even drug dealers and prostitutes understand that they have to make so
Re: (Score:2)
Ashley Madison clearly thought that there was something wrong with it, hence the picture of a woman signalling to keep quiet about the whole thing on their front page.
Some people used the service openly and that's fine, but let's not pretend that they didn't know that their service was aimed mostly at people who want to do immoral things and keep them hidden from their partner, who would be upset with their actions.
Re: (Score:2)
Morality has nothing to do with it.
Ethics have everything to do with it. This is a site dedicated to helping people lie to their partners, and in some cases, to violate vows made in public and backed by society in general as well as the state. In fact, this site's advertising blatantly ENCOURAGES people to do these things.
It's not about anyone being squeamish about sex, or even affairs. It's about lies, deception, and breaking promises, and about encouraging people to do these things.
Not to mention AM's *ow
Re: (Score:3)
Morality is a tough subject, but it's extremely hard to argue that cheating in a relationship is a moral action without a good dose of sophistry. The only situation one could argue, in my view, is when one lover says to another, 'I am OK with you having an affair but I don't want to hear about it'. While that situation absolutely exists, I would wager the majority of the activity on the site does not involve informed consent for the partner not participating.
Re: Judging by the story so far... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Judging by the story so far... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Marriage is a voluntary moral action and concept. Breaking the vows by cheating would be the opposite and therefor immoral by set concept. What illogical place do you live in?
Just a moment here.
Let me share something personal:
I've been married, and subsequently divorced. I won't bother with all the details as they're not relevant, and I hardly have the time.
I got married young (22) not as young as many, I know, however, I was bought up within a religion that promotes marriage (yup, Christian, but there are plenty of others) again, without going into all the details, I shouldn't have got married. It was not a 'moral decision' to get married.
It was about as voluntary as date-
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad I posted on this topic already, here's a virtual +1 informative from me. And I DO have modpoints!
Goddam.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think morality is an outmoded concept. I'd be curious your thoughts on this:
http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_h... [ted.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Not all the AM users were cheating spouses. There were also quite a lot of non-cheating spouses checking on who was listed, non-married or divorced people, and users who never got to the meeting-up stage. I'm sure there were a bunch of students genuinely doing research from the profiles' info, too. And they're all affected the same way.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure there were a bunch of students genuinely doing research from the profiles' info
Unless you mean that in the sense of 'research, heh, nudge-nudge-wink-wink, say no more', I'd be very surprised. Any ethics committee that approves such an experiment would be seriously derelict in their duty (anonymity and informed consent? What are they?).
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you mean that in the sense of 'research, heh, nudge-nudge-wink-wink, say no more', I'd be very surprised. Any ethics committee that approves such an experiment would be seriously derelict in their duty (anonymity and informed consent? What are they?).
I don't know if he's telling the truth or not, but at least one semi-well known guy is claiming that was what he was doing. [thehill.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
His story is credible, but still kind of scummy. He claims he had an account on the site so he could check if his client's political enemies had profiles on the site. Presumably, so they could either blackmail or expose them for political advantage.
Re: (Score:2)
Not even an apology. [ashleymadison.com]
They have this whole press page and everything:
http://media.ashleymadison.com... [ashleymadison.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No attempt to even notify people that their info was stolen.
Please do not make stuff up. Provide some proof that they haven't notified at least some of their users.
"California law requires a business or state agency to notify any California resident whose unencrypted personal information, as defined, was acquired, or reasonably believed to have been acquired, by an unauthorized person."
https://oag.ca.gov/ecrime/data... [ca.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
It's a Canadian company, hosted in Canada. How's FTC going to enforce their rules in Canada?
Re: (Score:2)
Have the USA invade Canada first. Come on, I wonder why you even asked!
as mentioned before (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The financial *and* legal option (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Aside from a few corner cases like the woman who apparently was using the service with her husband's consent because he was incapable, I'm not having much sympathy for the sites operators or its actual users, so that pretty much wipes out the rest of the options.
Sure, but in that case why wouldn't the woman choose another dating or hookup site and *not* one that is designed to have at least one party be unfaithful to their significant other?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but in that case why wouldn't the woman choose another dating or hookup site and *not* one that is designed to have at least one party be unfaithful to their significant other?
AM users are probably more likely to be seeking a short-term thing with no long-term commitment, and less likely to have STDs. They are also probably more likely to be more mature, financially stable, hygienic, etc. In other words, they have the qualities that would attract someone to marry them. I doubt a lot of AM users are pot heads with no job, a shitty apartment, no car, bad hygiene, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt a lot of AM users are pot heads with no job, a shitty apartment, no car, bad hygiene, etc.
I doubt that too, but not because it's a site for cheaters. I doubt it because it's a site that costs money. A free site is more likely to have those things. Cheaters come from all walks of life, rich and poor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not having much sympathy for the sites operators or its actual users, so that pretty much wipes out the rest of the options.
So, basically because the site provides a service you don't agree with, they are fair game for an illegal intrusion? I don't agree with their business model either, but I don't agree that they somehow "deserved" the breach.
Re: (Score:2)
So, basically because the site provides a service you don't agree with, they are fair game for an illegal intrusion?
Wouldn't that be awesome!
Imagine church websites, tax websites, iTunes website, all being legal to be hacked. I almost exploded in my pants!
Some other negative outcome not here named... (Score:5, Funny)
Some useless tripe we didn't need.
One more hoss not worth the hay.
As Cowboyneal rides awayyyyyyyy...
So far it's looking like nothing (Score:2)
I have to admit I was kind of hoping some enterprising person would have taken the data dumps and meshed them with some other data and given us a searchable database of the morally compromised.
I'm guessing, though, that besides that Duggar guy, most of their clients are either assholes or guileless sadsacks trapped in sexless relationships, and frankly, I don't need to know more about either of them.
Who is "Ashley Madison"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is she hot?
Legal? (Score:3)
Not going to happen because nobody wants to front a law to protect cheaters, for once the pretense of moral righteousness will work in the right favor. The real damage is of course to those that were cheated on, not because of the breach but because they married cheating bastards. If you want to sleep around I got no problem with that, just don't do it behind your spouse's back.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as only "little people" are affected, I agree. But as soon as "important people" are among the "victims", you can be sure politicians will create laws to protect them. Look at Europe and the "right to be forgotten" as an example.
As for people who were cheated on, if something doesn't hurt you as long as you don't know it, then it's because it doesn't really hurt and so is a minor problem.
A thought about the "Emotional" fallout. (Score:2)
I've given a lot of thought about emotional reactions in situations like these, and generally always conclude that the truth, while painful - leads to greater emotional stability in the long term, and thus greater happiness.
In this particular case, if your spouse is cheating on you, it's indicative of problems in your relationship. Isn't the best thing to get them out in the open to straighten them out, even if that includes divorces and harsh emotional consequences in the short term? Shouldn't it lead to
Educational (Score:5, Insightful)
It's one of the few ways to truly educate people about the value of privacy, software security, and not putting stuff you don't want public on the internet.
Other notable impact: literal loss of life (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I hear what you are saying. But if you are looking to commit homosexual adultery in a country where both are illegal and punishable by death....you wouldn't think that would be something you'd advertise online for, on a website with millions of people that anyone, including the local police could trivially join.
Given the well-documented spying mechanisms most, if not all, of these nations have against their own citizens it would be fairly trivial for them to put names to those email addresses and start going on some witch hunts.
They could also simply run fake bait profiles, and scoop up anyone who tried to hookup. Given that users intention by using the site was to hookup with local people... this seems like shooting fish
Crap (Score:2)
Missing Option (Score:4, Interesting)
"Some other negative outcome" (Score:4)
A swarm of SJW idiots making excuses for the cheating low-lifes who used the site and ironically now feel betrayed.
or... "Some other negative outcome" (Score:2, Informative)
A swarm of idiots whining about SJWs. Those self-righteous dumb shits that cry out in support of the poor oppressed victims. Those poor oppressed victims -- themselves and their delicate sensitivities against hearing any opposing viewpoint. What's a good acronym for an SJW-calling douchebag?
I've heard:
WML -- White Male Libertarian -- because that's the demographic
SIW -- Social Ignorance Warrior -- because they spread ignorance and generally shut down debate
Maybe just SJW-caller?
Worst outcome? Social. All the fucking prudes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Now. I'm not saying cheating on one's significant other is okay. Far from it.
But the whole, holier-than-thou, buttinsky lot of self-appointed moral guardians who are PERFECTLY happy to tear people down for their perceived faults, as if these hypocrites had no faults of their own, and generally starting a fast-pitch league in their own glass houses.
I know, I know. The US, in general, is stupidly puritanical and judgmental (with emphasis on "mental").
And, basically, these assholes feel that everyone else's rights cease when such rights contradict their "feels" and prejudices.
The world would be MUCH better off if everyone would just mind their own fucking business and stop prying into other peoples' lives.
Re: (Score:2)
But the whole, holier-than-thou, buttinsky lot of self-appointed moral guardians who are PERFECTLY happy to tear people down for their perceived faults, as if these hypocrites had no faults of their own, and generally starting a fast-pitch league in their own glass houses.
The people you're rooting for have betrayed the person who is supposed to be most important to them for short-term satisfaction which endangers both their life and that of their partner. You're not going to gain any moral high ground by defending them. A percentage of them are simply people who chose to assist them in this fraud. You're not going to gain any more high ground by defending them, either.
Society only works if we agree that lies are bad. It's too bad you can't join the big parade and get on boar
Re: (Score:2)
The people you're rooting for...
Hello? I'm NOT rooting for anyone.
And I'm NOT defending them. What they did was wrong. I know this.
But denouncing someone from a bully pulpit, as if you were perfect, is bullshit.
Always has been.
Re: (Score:2)
But the whole, holier-than-thou, buttinsky lot of self-appointed moral guardians
But these people spend their time molding social norms to fit their idea about how the world works. Practical advice: Humans are not monogamous. If that's a social convention you and your spouse choose to pursue, about half of you will fail. Learn to deal with it. Some honesty, apologies, maybe a little couples counseling and get on with your lives.
But the moral wingnuts jump up and down sreaming "Tragedy!" That's why couples split and screw up the kids. And support lawyers in their lavish lifestyles*.
*N
Re: (Score:3)
But the whole, holier-than-thou, buttinsky lot of self-appointed moral guardians who are PERFECTLY happy to tear people down for their perceived faults, as if these hypocrites had no faults of their own, and generally starting a fast-pitch league in their own glass houses.
I know, I know. The US, in general, is stupidly puritanical and judgmental (with emphasis on "mental").
And, basically, these assholes feel that everyone else's rights cease when such rights contradict their "feels" and prejudices.
The world would be MUCH better off if everyone would just mind their own fucking business and stop prying into other peoples' lives.
Oh, the irony.
You know what often the hardest thing for people who are "tolerant" and "non-judgmental" is? To recognize how intolerant and judgmental they can be, particularly toward those whom they perceive (whether justifiably or not) as intolerant or judgmental.
Reading your other comments, I get that you don't think people should rant about their own moral feelings, and they shouldn't judge all Ashley Madison users together -- because, as you point out, probably not all of them are the jerks that ev
Legal? (Score:2)
Reading the stories, much of the embarassment has to do with friends or coworkers finding out - not just spouses. Given the data has already been released where anyone can find it, you could have 10 different people blackmailing the same person - and still not pr
My opinion: it's a big hit on new tech (Score:2)
Just like Mt. Gox, I believe the problem with the AM breach is people stepping back a lot on their online practices. Some might say its use induces moral/ethical practices, and in AM specifically propagating such practices to IRL/AFK. But I believe keeping human flaws hidden in thought is much worse for individuals and society in general.
One of the most relevant things the Internet has brought us, through stuff like social web (influencing our real life friendships) or article comments (showing how critical
Missing option (Score:2)
No good marriage ends in divorce. (Score:2)
This is just the beginning (Score:3, Interesting)
To all of you gleefully flaunting your moral indignation and schadenfreude at these people's comeuppance, I have some news for you: this is just the beginning. One day your eharmony profile and all the embarassing messages you sent will be available for all to see, all the nasty comments you anonymously posted on blogs, all the IM logs, all your txts, all your sexts, and all the porn you've ever looked at. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone, seems those of you who call yourselves Christian forgot that again.
Worse even, is these hackers took no care whatsoever to protect the people who live in countries where adultery is illegal. People are going to go to jail, be tortured, or killed. Everywhere else, spouses and the kids are going to be humiliated, careers destroyed, and lots of suicides.
And for what? Most of the people who used this site were just going for a thrill, they never actually managed to hook up an affair, and if they did they probably backed out. No worse than looking at porn, hell it's a lot less "sick" even, at least they're interested in adult women for real "normal" sex.
So yea, take your self-righteous attitude and consider this a warning: cut it out because you're next. Don't encourage the hackers.
Vote results (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of poll placement, upon the Vote action, I'd like to see the full outcome, not just X% that shared my vote.
The doughnut chart is pretty, but please show all poll options on the chart. I might still click in to read the comments, but want the quick results view wherever the poll may be.
Re: (Score:2)
The greatest fallout will be the children and spouses of AM's clientele that didn't realize there was a problem. But, as it was AM's clientele who created this problem (the data breach just caused it to happen sooner rather than later), I had to choose one of the security options.
Sites like AM must be extra careful with data. Many states have laws against having extra-marital affairs and AM facilitates such behavior. If one of their clients is from one of these states, the spouse of a client could sue AM as
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, Utah has special polygammy laws too. Apparetly they have something against sex.
Utah is a special case. Utah was settled by Mormon pioneers in 1847. The Mormons were forced from their homes back east (read up on the Extermination Order) for their religion practices, desire to do away with slavery, and tendency to vote en bloc (despite Church leaders not giving political mandates). In 1850 Deseret petitioned for statehood, but was denied because Mormons practiced polygamy. Not only that, congress forced them to change their name to Utah Territory because Deseret had too strong a religio
Re: (Score:2)
But I think security is far more lasting
Nonsense. If you go to ashleymadison.com *right now* and scroll down you can clearly see that they have a "Trusted Security Award" (whatever that is, it's not linked to anything), "100% Discreet Service", and a little SSL Secure Site badge, so you know your data is secure.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop being unfaithful to your spouse, boy/girlfriend, problem solved!
OR... Don't be stupid and use your real name, identity details, common E-mail addresses or pay with a personal credit card online at sites that might be embarrassing... Burner phone numbers are a good idea too..
Actually, don't do any of this even on sites you don't mind being associated with....
Re: (Score:3)
It won't be a DA. It would be unlikely that the charges would stand up.
However, the UCMJ makes adultery illegal, and lots of email addresses ended in .mil.