Welp
- Thread starter gteeitup
- Start date
Call me old fashioned, but good. What a disgusting business model. Sorry, but I have zero tolerance for marital infidelity.
Have to wonder, though...how many of those 37 million people will find their spouse on the list if the names are released? Sheesh.
Have to wonder, though...how many of those 37 million people will find their spouse on the list if the names are released? Sheesh.
so you're secretly hoping it's published for the multiple helicopter crashes it will create, or is that just me?
I'm a big fan of schadenfreude, but that might be too much to handle. Can you imagine the number of calls coming into divorce attorneys and the lines at county clerks' offices? Not to mention the number of SUVs crashed into trees and fire hydrants all across this great nation.
The first thing the CEO said about the situation was that the security holes that allowed the breach have been sealed. So I'm guessing that for each account that's closed in fear of being exposed, four new accounts will open expecting full anonymity.
What's the big deal? I met my current slam piece on Ashley Madison.
Although infidelity is bad, I have no interest in watching anyone get exposed for such. That being said, anyone who signed up knew they were doing something wrong and sneaking around, so they knew the risks and took the chance. I don't feel sorry for them one bit.
This is groundbreaking! It's the first time I've ever seen @Raising Heel let emotion trump reason/logic when debating/discussing something.
I'm sure you're just being funny, but let me ask. What is illogical about my stance against extramarital affairs?
A small percentage of that 37 million might have an open relationship to which both spouses agreed, but the vast majority pledged to their spouse (and probably to God) that they would "forsake all others."
Until I read this story yesterday, I had no idea there was even such a website. What is wrong with us? Can't people have affairs the old fashioned way where you have to put some work into it? Kids today have everything handed to them. In my day, if you wanted to cheat on your wife, it took careful planning and considerable work...or at least, that's what I've heard.
Just like I don't care who marries whom, I don't care who cheats on whom. That's your dog, Charlie Brown.
Just like I don't care who marries whom, I don't care who cheats on whom. That's your dog, Charlie Brown.
I'm actually not being funny at all.
The issue at hand is -- essentially -- cyber blackmail. Forget the detail of Ashley Madison for a second. A company who promises privacy and discretion to its users, which is a realistic and basic consumer demand from any website/company, has been hacked, and the hackers are blackmailing said company. The hackers are saying "shut your company down or we will publicly release all your users' names and information because we [the hackers] don't believe in what your company stands for or facilitates." This is blackmail and vigilantism.
There's nothing illogical about your stance against extramarital affairs; however, in this specific case, you're letting that stance/belief encroach upon a separate issue here....i.e., should we now allow hackers to become vigilantes and hold companies/organizations hostage because they (the hackers) don't believe in what said company/organization does or represents? That's quite the slippery slope don't you think? Who gets to judge what is morally sound and what isn't? Having an affair isn't ILLEGAL. It can be construed as unethical, unholy, etc., but it isn't punishable by law (yes it can lead to divorce but marriage is so messy because of its ties to taxes and government benefits).
I'm simply saying I'm surprised you're letting a belief of yours enter in to your opinion on the legality/ethicalness of something; whereas on other topics you do not (such as how you don't believe in gay marriage but you support the right for homosexuals to marry so that they can reap the financial benefits that heterosexual married couples are eligible for).
TL;DR: insert a different type of company into this situation instead of Ashley Madison and people's view might be different.
Oh, I see what you're saying. Let me clarify. My "good" comment was a condemnation of the site, not praise for the hackers. But I can see why you got that impression.
What the hackers did was illegal and they should be prosecuted if caught. The nature of the site is irrelevant. How's that for logical?
For the record, adultery is actually illegal (and grounds for divorce) in several states. I assume the company has no legal liability since it only facilitates adultery.Also, my understanding is that "The Impact Team" didn't hack the site because of the nature of the business. The hackers acted because they felt the company had lied to its clients. The company allowed clients to pay to have all their personal data deleted, but instead retained information like names, billing details, etc.
TL;DR version: What the hackers did was wrong, but it couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of people.
