Fitness Site Accidentally Shows Sexual Activity 297
smitty777 writes "FitBit is a wearable device created to track calorie usage based on activities. Unfortunately for some users, one of those is sexual activities. The information gained from the device is uploaded to the users online web account, which is searchable by Google. From the article: 'Yikes. Users of fitness and calorie tracker Fitbit may need to be more careful when creating a profile on the site. The sexual activity of many of the users of the company’s tracker and online platform can be found in Google Search results, meaning that these users’ profiles are public and searchable.'" It's just a matter of time before a line gets crossed and a relationship gets ruined by trying to post the largest Fitbit numbers for the evening.
Problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Problem (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I can see a problem with sexual activity if my wife's FitBit's numbers aren't equal or a subset or mine. And I'm not religious.
What if hers are a super-set of yours because she masturbates more than you? Is that a problem? I mean, besides reflecting poorly on your skills as a lover.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt the device could tell the difference for some people. Maybe it's just included in the same numbers?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Food for thought.
Yeah, I know. AC being female on
Re: (Score:2)
It just means she likes to "work out" more than you. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Is monogamy in a relationship a strictly religious concept? I don't think it really is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Problem (Score:4, Insightful)
What has trust got to do with sexual activity(anymore than it has to do with any other activity in a relationship)?
Why not have sexual activity with other people as long as both parties are happy with it and are honest about it? If they are not, then that is probably as a result of social memes not because of honesty and trust.
I'm not saying that is wrong, but it is what it is.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
People really need to question more *why* they believe what they believe. I think if more people really took an honest look at their positions they would see how much of it is social construction and learned behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is a huge portion of society where
Re: (Score:3)
"Your tone suggests that you think your opinion has a deeper truth behind it. I hate it when people take that kind of superior attitude."
Ohh, the irony.
child support (Score:3)
It's all fine and dandy until you have to pay child support.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. If you want to have an open relationship and are fine with it, then more power to you. But jealousy related to non-monogamous partners is not a "social meme". And most marriage ceremonies (or similar human bonding rituals) include a promise to be monogamous. So, in general, sexual activity is very closely related to honesty and trust.
There are many reasons why humans would have evolved to prefer a monogamous relationship, and, from the fact that almost all cultures enforce monogamous relatio
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
However, if people really wanted and preferred total monogamy then.... why would the cultures that inist on monogamy seem to have to have so many rules and so much insistence on it. You never find rules saying you must eat when hungry. Rules only tend to be made about things that people don't naturally want to do. If people really preferred it, we wouldn't need the ceremonies and rules.
I wont say that jealousy isn't natural or isn't present in people in open relationships, I am in one, and I can say yes, I
Re: (Score:3)
Why not have sexual activity with other people as long as both parties are happy with it and are honest about it? If they are not, then that is probably as a result of social memes not because of honesty and trust.
Emphasis mine.
Dude, this is exactly what everyone is trying to tell you. If two people choose to have a monogamous relationship -- and there are a lot of people who do regardless of their religion or lack thereof -- then they won't be happy about a breach of monogamy even if the partner is honest about it. The fact that some peoples' religions teach monogamy is unimportant. They don't have to base their decision on a religious teaching if they don't want to. They can just agree to the rules of the relations
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly the motivation is slightly different for women, they have
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The trust has to do not with sexual activity, but with people generally being possessive with regards to each other in a relationship (especially women towards men but this may be a cultural bias, not necessary evolutional/biological).
This is a universal trait of humans and it's not dependent on religion. It has more to do with inherent egoism and self interest.
Take a look at any ancient epics like Greek myths or Norse sagas.
Re: (Score:3)
No they dont. it is ASSUMED and not written out clearly.
"Do you, dave, promise to not have sex with other people even though your wife permits it?" I dont remember those words at any wedding....
You do realize that social monogamy is not commonplace. Most Muslim countries allow a man to have multiple wives. In fact it was highly common for a man to have multiple wives for MOST of history.
Monogamy, no matter how much it is sanctioned legally or socially, or how righteous it is portrayed religiously, was
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is assumed. You don't solemnly swear to help with the dishes or take out the garbage either.
When people announce their intent to spend the rest of their lives together, it is a given that they be considerate of each others' needs and desires and be willing to make compromises when their partners' needs or desires conflict with their o
Re: (Score:2)
No, most married couples have actually not just 'assumed' their spouse will be faithful, but have actually MENTIONED that requirement to each other. 'Faithful' is part of the standard vows, you know; and most people, you know, TALK before they get married.
You do realize that social monogamy is not commonplace. Most Muslim countries allow a man to have multiple wives
Commonplace throughout all the cultures that have significant impact on west
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I guess it just depends on the vows you choose, be sure to read and fully understand the EULA.
Re: (Score:3)
"I have attended included the line "forsaking all others...""
Hmmm...
Definition of FORSAKE
transitive verb, to renounce or turn away from entirely
What a horrible thing to promise. you shall forsake all others so you need to renounce your family, and turn away from your children in need.
Wow, Weddings have become brutal!
Re: (Score:3)
I believe that in those circumstances, marriage is a way of saying that despite what happens outside the relationship they'll always return to their spouse. I'm just guessing, mind you. I'm in a closed marriage myself, been locked in for many years but still getting a good interest rate!
Re: (Score:2)
you are a backward hillbilly that cant think. IT's obvious you dont understand marriage let alone even human relations and sexuality.
Come on back when you can talk like an adult and not be a coward that is too much of a pussy to post under your own account.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Can I have sex with your girlfriend? Is that alright man? I think she likes me.
Why are you asking him?
Why aren't you asking her?
Here's how it works, in my case at least: you want to have sex with my g/f, you ask her. She and I will talk about it, and what we say to each other is none of your damned business. After that conversation, she may say yes to you, she may say no. Either way, she'll have her reasons, which are also none of your damned business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheating means doing it without permission.
You are not cheating if she gives her blessing. As in Polyamory Relationships, Swingers, etc....
Not everyone has a uptight puritan view on sex and relationships...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's about trust. I'm an atheist and I don't cheat on my wife.
Your statement makes my head hurt.
You say it's about trust... But, if you really trusted your wife (or your wife trusted you, or whatever), then some weird numbers showing up on a website wouldn't be an issue. The assumption would be that she was masturbating, or the device was malfunctioning, or something like that. It only becomes a problem when you don't trust your wife and the assumption is that she's cheating on you. Or, I suppose, when she actually does cheat on you.
But... If we set aside your st
Re: (Score:3)
If I make a really great pie and give it to you, then you make me promise not to make that pie for anyone else so it can be special between just you and me, and (importantly) I agree to this arrangement, then you have every right to get pissed off if you catch me secretly making this pie for other people.
When two people enter an agreement based on trust, it doesn't matter what the arrangement is. It's wrong for one of them to violate the agreement. And exclusivity in sexual partner selection (and the anger
Re: (Score:3)
But is it not religious memes that make you have this problem?
So you are saying that a person whose mate has been unfaithful is upset simply because he has learned that his mate is a sinner? By your logic, persons together in a long-term sexual relationship but unmarried should not feel jelousy because they each already know that they are both fornicators.
While religous and cultural theories of sexuality have a huge impact, I don't think they can explain something as viceral as sexual jelously. People feel jelously because sexual intercourse is an intense shared exper
Re: (Score:3)
But is it not religious memes that make you have this problem?
It's only in the last century or two that vaguely successful methods of STD prevention have been developed. Prior to that, if you had a lot of sex with a lot of different people the chances are you were going to get some disease that would kill you, or at least hurt you lots.
Then there was also the problem of pregnancy... if you go around having sex with a lot of different people someone's going to get pregnant to someone who isn't really that interested in raising a child with them. And pregnancy is danger
Re: (Score:2)
But is it not religious memes that make you have this problem?
Monogamy is not unique to the teachings of religion, nor are other relationship patterns anathema to all religions. While you could claim that atheists who are monogamous are so through tradition based on the old religions of their upbringing/ancestors, that doesn't hold water as some religions openly permit other forms of relationship.
For many it is a trust/safety issue and has nothing to do with what religion and tradition say on the matter. I'm an athiest and aside from my mentalist period over a deca
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I disagree it is positive to feel jealous about their sexual activity. I might as well be jealous of the social life that they have that I don't.
Consider an alternate society where it was considered unfaithful for your wife to have male friends. You might then feel jealous when you realise she is friends with her boss. I don't see the difference between that situation and the current one in our society re: sex; it's just a matter of where you draw the line.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
we all do that already, but indirectly, through taxation payments which end up in welfare/social security payments to parents unable/unwilling to provide for their own children.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Problem (Score:4, Informative)
For me (when I was in an open relationship) we didn't use the term cheating. Having sex with someone else was not cheating as long as we told the other person about it (we were also allowed to vito the other person's choices if we felt the need). Now if she had lied to me about sex with someone or i had said "Look I'm not happy with you keeping seeing him whilst I'm away on business" and she had done it anyway then that would have been cheating and been a serious problem; but simply having sex was not cheating because it wasn't against the rules/agreement. So yes I would have had a massive problem with her cheating but cheating for us had a different definition. There were also rules about contraception that you had to trust the other person to follow that would have made it obvious if she was not following the rules, therefore I'd have known that they'd have been someone else's kids just as much as if this had been a normal relationship.
Re:Problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Humans, even in pre-civilized times would migrate around in small family units. It's more biological than you are giving it credit for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Problem (Score:5, Informative)
Those are just the first three things I came up with in a five minute search. There have been hundreds, even thousands, of scholarly papers written on this subject. It is so common, so fundamental to sociology and anthropology that I have no reservations on calling you out. You probably never knew anything about the subject to forget.
Re: (Score:3)
Rich people always get what they want. If I was Bill Gates, I'd probably have 4 wives myself. But that doesn't mean the women are genuinely OK with it. They stay that way because of my ridiculous power/money influence over them.
I'm sure it happened back in caveman days too, but don't tell me the other cavewoman didn't feel betrayed, ashamed, embarrassed, etc. It isn't all religion like you guys are trying to make it seem. There is more bio
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure it happened back in caveman days too, but don't tell me the other cavewoman didn't spend the downtime while it was happening getting plowed in the next cave over by Gronk instead
FTFY. See? I can make completely BS statements about cavemen, too.
There's more compelling evidence falling on the side of homo sapiens being an inherently non-monogamous species, in physiology and developmentally.
The instinct to fight over a mate (what we have since diluted down into the self-denigrating wangst-fest we call 'jealousy') isn't limited to monogamous species, either. In fact, it's one of the cornerstones of the selection process: You want Ugg's mate, prove you're stronger than Ugg.
For my thinki
Re: (Score:2)
Its actually more involved that than. Genetically, men can have multiple women because men are wired to perceive other men as threats. Genetically, women (>80%) do not see other women as threats and have no threat response even when seeing other women with their male mate. Therefore, genetically, we are designed to have one man and one or more women. Everything else is sociological, cultural, or religious.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.sexatdawn.com/ [sexatdawn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The human mind was built in pre-contraception days, when sex meant babies. And we are strongly conditioned by evolution to care for our genetic descendants, and not for another man's. Sexual jealousy is built into humans, particularly males, for Darwinian reasons.
it is my view that most religious practice is a rationalization of built-in human motives - ascribing to God motivations we have that we do not understand why we have. Essentially, religion is a coat of paint used to justify what we were going to d
Re: (Score:3)
Secondly, making the assumption that your use of 'God' means Yahweh, there was no divine mandate for monogamy before Christ and/or the
Re:Problem (Score:5, Funny)
If you think about it, it really is no different from other activity.
Why is having sex with other people different from other activies, like for example mount climbing?
Bullshit. The pregnancy part is a pretty big indicator. Think about it in evolutionary terms. We want to propagate our own genes, not help to propagate the genes of our wife's "mountain climbing" buddy. We have contraception now, but we also still have natural feelings of love for our wife and our own kids, jealousy of anyone who tries to edge in on our family, etc.
Have you ever had sex with anyone? As another commenter said, there is a lot of associated biochemical crap going on in that situation, especially if it's not just a one night stand. You're not going to be able to help feeling upset if you find out someone was cheating on you, unless you both agreed to an open relationship. Even if you both agreed, it won't always be easy unless you're a sociopath.
Re: (Score:3)
Your concept of evolution is individualistic while evolution may be much more "concerned" with a species rather than an individual. You also put human sexual practices in line with distant relatives like Elk rather than nearer relatives like Bonobos.
Think about the advantages a child would have multiple fathers. Not possible? In many pre-agricultural societies, there was the concept of partable parenthood which meant that any child had multiple biological fathers, which even if a misunderstanding of biol
Re: (Score:2)
The idea behind having sex with other people is bad is put there by the religions disapproval of premarital sex.
That's not true at all. Religion usurped their authority of marriage but it existed long before. And even before religious involvement sex has almost always been held to a different standard. That's why prostitution is considered the oldest profession.
Any time sex can occur there is the risk of socio-economic change. Genetically, none of us are geared toward casual sex. This is especially true for females who are genetically geared to view sex as both a means to establish/maintain a relationship and bring e
Re: (Score:2)
Why is having sex with other people different from other activies, like for example mount climbing?
If you can't see why sex is different from mountain climbing, you're either doing it wrong or I simply must start mountain climbing with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, research indicates the typical male brain feels threatened and mentally reacts as if a physical threat exists. Women on the other hand, typically do not feel it as such threat. In fact, men seeing other men topless can frequently initiate a threat response when around "their" women. Women on the other hand, have no such threat response even when viewing completely naked women around their mate. Which likely explains may behaviors at the beach.
Basically, what modern research appears to be telling u
Re: (Score:3)
Though little about this actually helps answer whether this is a learned trait or not.
I am in an open marriage myself, and have known/been with other people in similar boats. I can tell you, there are plenty of us out there who do not have these responses. Though, I find i still expect them in others. I remember the first time that I hung out with a firned of mine and her bf after the first time we hooked up, I found myself instinctively checking his expressions when things came up that indicated she had be
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't mean they can't be faithful.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet that is the basis of all Christian and Muslim Marriages.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's rather ironic actually, a lot of Millennials grew up in stereotypical picket fence households where parents went out of their way to keep anything remotely sexual away from their children. Now that generation is, to some degree, hiding their sexuality from their parents but less so from each other. I only hope they
Re:Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because something is "normal" doesn't mean it should be done in public.
Re:Problem (Score:4, Funny)
Correct, the propelr place for that is on Twitter..
http://twitter.com/#!/search/i%20have%20to%20poop [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm. Maybe if we couple the toiled with a weight sensor to post to facebook....
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I just had a colonoscopy to ensure nothing was wrong. I think I surprised the staff by asking the monitor be turned my way. (There is no need for much if any anesthesia, BTW.) Watched them zap a polyp, no big deal.
I have friends who are too uptight to get a colonoscopy because it's "embarrassing", as if an ostomy is less so!
Shitting in public only matters if one has a taboo against it We must shit somewhere, but taboos are a choice. Military latrines were once "open bay" (easier to ventilate and clean) and
Re:Problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides religion there are other good reasons why you don't want that information to be public. Sexual activity is a private thing, and should be kept that way.
1. Showing that you have too much or two little says things about your private life that you may not want to be public. Eg. You got onto an argument that day, or get other worried that your relationship is failing.
2. If you are trying to have children, you may not want to let the public know this until it is fact. As this could effect ones personal career.
3. It makes it unconfortable for those who are not getting some.
Re: (Score:2)
Further, problems professionally with having children are not an argument for privacy but characterize a fundamental flaw with society that needs to be fixed. Yes, pregnancy is bad for business, but every company that talks out of both sides of its mouth needs to be taught a lesson. Either come out and just say 'we don't support working mothers because we are selfish assholes' and deal w
Re: (Score:2)
No. the problem is when someone is cheating and they input it into their device to track their fitness and their significant other finds out about it through Google. Even without religious hangups or whatever, once you've made a commitment to one person it's wrong to break that commitment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think if all taboos surrounding sexuality are gone, it's not as much fun anymore.
I strongly disagree. I've seen attitudes towards sex change a lot over the years, for the better, and sex has never been more fun because of it. Porn is becoming more mainstream and higher quality because of its acceptance, I don't have to hide my stash from my wife, you can buy accessories to have sex in any position/location you want and so on. Ten years ago it was near impossible to find good straps for bondage, now you can practically buy them at the grocery store. I think if all taboos surrounding
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Problem isn't the sexual activity. Problem is the mindset that people have about it, teached by religions for hundreds of years. When people can finally put that past them and accept that, just like for them, sexual activity is a normal human function there is no need to worry about stuff like this.
You could say the same about murder, child labor, infanticide, and denial of comfort to the suffering. The problem is not 'mindset' but that those things are wrong. Sexual activity showing up on FitBit violat
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, but from the company's perspective, it is easier to change your product than to change the mindset of millions* of potential customers.
* There are billions of people in the world, but I am assuming that the number of people who could afford, and would be interested in, purchasing a device that posts your workout information to a social networking site is significantly lower.
Re: (Score:2)
No the problem is that people without their spouse's knowledge and consent are engaging in activities that they not only vowed not to, but could very easily injure the non-participating spouse. If a Husband and Wife decide that soft swapping, hard swapping or even playing separately is OK in the marriage then fine, prior knowledge and competent informed consent makes a big difference. Most of the time it's simply one person lying and conniving behind the other spouse's back.
Re: (Score:3)
Bingo. Sexual Freedom has consequences that none of the "Sexual taboos are all religious" people love to ignore. Sexual taboos keep people safer than wonton sexuality.
Tell a kid that they are sleeping with Susie slut who has five kinds of VD and they'll think twice about Susie's slut activities. Or if you look at the long term consequences of such activities you'll see a long line of idiots who can't keep their dick in their pants living in cars because the slept around on their wife and the wife (and kid)
Fitness Site Accidentally Shows Sexual Activity (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Sexual Activity: Active Vigorous Effort started 2pm. Duration 4 hours 15 minutes 347 Calories.
Looks like 'tracking' to me/
Re:Fitness Site Accidentally Shows Sexual Activity (Score:4, Funny)
That's desperate.
The user should try the other hand.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
When you create a profile, the default privacy setting allows profiles to be found in search results (Google, Bing, etc). If you don’t unclick this setting, it will obviously make your profile public for anyone to find.
Safe defaults is the most important part of computer security and is exactly the bit Microsoft took years to learn (and still hasn't got completely). FitBits should default this to off and then turn it on gradually as they are convinced the user has understood the implications. They (along with FaceBook etc.) are 100% to blame.
4 hours and 15 minutes? (Score:2)
Did that guy from the screenshot in TFA have sexual activity for 4 hours and 15 minutes? FitBit is really good for your stamina, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about Stamina (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly this is a Streisand Effect / Slashvertisement of epic Cunningness.
By reporting this people will be attracted to the site where they hear about Jeff, a user of FitBit, gets Vigorous sex for over 4 hours. People will be queueing to join.
Fitbit's fault (Score:2, Insightful)
From the article:
So why are Fitbit users’ profiles able to be searchable in Google? It’s not really Fitbit’s fault. When you create a profile, the default privacy setting allows profiles to be found in search results (Google, Bing, etc). If you don’t unclick this setting, it will obviously make your profile public for anyone to find.
It is very clearly Fitbit's fault. This option should be unchecked by default, so that users who don't notice it don't accidentally make their profiles p
Re: (Score:2)
I own a Fitbit. It was Fitbit's fault. Apparently, though, nobody at Slashdot thought to actually look at Fitbit's site [fitbit.com]:
Re: (Score:2)
So, ummm... (Score:2)
...Where do you attach this accelerometer-based apparatus when you're boinking?
rj
Jane Fonda (Score:2)
Blocked by Google? (Score:2)
True story: (Score:4, Funny)
I am a cardiologist.
A young male patient goes to his female primary care doc and tells her that he gets palpitations sporadically. To rule out a suptraventricular tachycardia, she places him on a 24 hour home telemetry monitor. The monitor shows a (normal) fast heart rate at 11pm, so she sends him to me.
I ask him what he was doing. Apparently his girlfriend thought that the monitor was "hot", so they did it with the monitor on. The patient was too embarrased to tell his primary care, so he was sent to me.
I wrote in my letter to the primary care that the increased rate was due to "normal physiologic activity".
why online in the first place? (Score:2)
If you choose to store the data on the website, then you have done this to share this data.
from the first page of fitlib site: "Walk within 15ft of the provided basestation and your data will be automatically uploaded to the Fitbit website."
But it is easier to blame the technology. Somthing could be tagged wrong, or should not have been made public.
Calories burned in sex or duration of sex do not seem to indicate quality i would say.