# Ashley Madison Discussion



## aj47 (Aug 22, 2015)

I wrote a poem about Ashley Madison and I got little critique and a lot of people wanting to discuss it.

So, how about here?

My thoughts:

The data is stolen.  That means if I download it, I'm receiving stolen property.
There's no guarantee that I'll get a copy without embedded malware anyway.
The people in that database are all consenting adults.
Humans are naturally promiscuous. Marriage is a social construct to keep rich men from hogging all the wives/women.  No citation, but I remember reading in Matt Ridley's _The Red Queen_ about a study of heredity that was called off because too many of the children were biologically unrelated to their "fathers".

So, I don't care.  If your name is in there, it makes no never-mind to me.  I don't really get the glee people are expressing about the data being stolen & posted.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 22, 2015)

Amen, Annie. It's not my job to police other people's monogamy or lack thereof.


----------



## Boofy (Aug 22, 2015)

I wholeheartedly agree. 

Those hacktivists should maybe consider using what skills they have to better effect. What do they gain from trying to force such a personal ideology on people? It's a waste of resources. People frown on cheating, yes. Should those who cheat then forfeit their right to suffer the consequences of their actions, whatever they may be, on their own terms? It's nobody's business but the people who are involved in each individual circumstance. People do love a good public shaming, don't they?


----------



## 20oz (Aug 22, 2015)

I know what you mean.

I finally came forward to my blow-up doll yesterday. She hasn't stopped crying since. :triumphant:


----------



## 20oz (Aug 22, 2015)

In all seriousness, these things tend to get out. I'm not sorry they got caught and I'm not cheering their privacy was exposed.

People, you only have one life, try not to fuck it up.


----------



## aj47 (Aug 22, 2015)

I could be way off base here, but I don't think all the folks on the site were married and cheating.  I say this because if some woman wanted to be a mistress, a site for cheating husbands would be a good place to find someone to "keep" her.


----------



## bazz cargo (Aug 22, 2015)

I'm busy living my life, I don't have time to run anybody else’s, and I sure as hell don't want someone to run mine for me.


----------



## 20oz (Aug 22, 2015)

astroannie said:


> I could be way off base here, but I don't think all the folks on the site were married and cheating.  I say this because if some woman wanted to be a mistress, a site for cheating husbands would be a good place to find someone to "keep" her.



I think you're opening up a can of worms there. What if a man/woman wanted to have sex with a different person because they only had one sexual partner throughout the lives? What's if there's a single person who just wanted to have sex with anything that moves?

There's going to be causalities in a hack as big as this.


----------



## aj47 (Aug 22, 2015)

Well, yeah.  I didn't mean there wouldn't be.  But for all the "cheating husbands' that people seem to be outraged about ... well, it takes a minimum of two. I read somewhere that more women get accounts on there the day after Mother's Day than any other day of the year.  This could of course be hogwash--people once put it about that Super Bowl Sunday was the worst day for domestic violence in the US and that turned out to be bogus.  But it's not just philandering men even though they seem to be the ones publicized.


----------



## TJ1985 (Aug 22, 2015)

I see it from several perspectives. I've been cheated on, and it stinks. The thing nobody seems to see? If a partner in a relationship has the inclination to cheat around, they will. The medium is moot, because people were unfaithful for centuries before Al Gore invented the internet. It happens commonly, and it stinks every single time. 

The site in question? It simplified the process of cheating, but let's look at things honestly: The internet is not, under any circumstances, safe. No site can be considered bulletproof. Some sites have a great motivation to try harder than others, but even they could be cracked if the right set of thieves were to make it their goal. As I understand it from the news, many high-ranking political email addresses are involved, but I haven't heard a single name spouted so it could be much ado about nothing if the names never come out publicly. If you don't want to be "outed" as a dirty rotten cheater when a website gets hacked, maybe don't go to a website to cheat. When people are too lazy to log off and cheat out of a bar like normal people, our society loses the war against over-reliance on technology, lol. 

Cheaters will find a way. The grass is greener in other pastures, and I've been the grass in the dying pasture. Don't want to be caught up in a scandal? Don't be scandalous. For those caught up in this, I hate being crass, but it was bound to happen sooner or later. Cheaters will confess, or get caught, or get outed. It happens. If it hadn't been the "hacktivists", it'd have been a hard to explain receipt from a florist or lingerie shop, a co-worker who forgets and tells the spouse they weren't there on Tuesday night. Hell, let's look at the classical "lipstick on the collar". It's a cliche, but it originated somewhere. A hint of perfume or cologne that has only one good way to have gotten on 'em. Cheaters get caught, and had it not been for this site being hacked, the wheels would have fallen off eventually in another way. 

On the other side, if I own a server or space on that server, I consider it private property. I own it, I pay to maintain it, I am held responsible for the content just like a brick and mortar property. I'd like to see some techno wizard pursue the hackers, and I'd love for them to somehow be charged for breaking and entering just like a brick and mortar property. They weren't invited in, and if they'd done the same thing to a piece of tangible property they'd stand for charges. They'd not be seen as heroes for a late night smash and grab. The internet is growing, but the applicable laws aren't growing with it. 

As for pushing one's ideals and opinions, it's human nature but that doesn't make it acceptable nature. There are lots of things that happen that grate my personal code, but that doesn't make it acceptable for me to meddle in the lives of others. I try to have enough going on in my own life that I don't have time to run the lives of others. I feel sorry for those who don't have a life of their own and must spend their days pushing their personal moral code on others.


----------



## Blade (Aug 22, 2015)

astroannie said:


> So, I don't care.  If your name is in there, it makes no never-mind to me.  I don't really get the glee people are expressing about the data being stolen & posted.



It looks like there is little to be gained by putting your nose into it. For my personal acquaintances it would only demonstrate that they are more interesting than I had supposed.#-o 



20oz said:


> There's going to be causalities in a hack as big as this.



Imagine if you were a guy from a hard core Islamic country messing in gay stuff.:livid:


----------



## Bard_Daniel (Aug 22, 2015)

While I don't agree with the Ashley Madison site, and its approval of infidelity, those people do not deserve to have their info posted up, publicly, for all to see. That is unwarranted. People would have cheated without the site. As TJ has said, infidelity has been around since the eons of time.

Though I also agree with the fact that if you don't want to get caught doing things you shouldn't be doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing them in the first place.

Hackers are nasty.


----------



## Riis Marshall (Aug 22, 2015)

Hello Annie

Should have been 'the data _are_'.

Riis


----------



## Sam (Aug 22, 2015)

Rule number one of the Internet: if you are going to join a dodgy site, of whatever variety, have some frigging common sense and don't use your own personal e-mail. In fact, don't use any e-mail that contains your own name. Logic one-oh-one. 

If you haven't got the common sense to know how to create another e-mail address, you shouldn't be joining dodgy sites in the first place.


----------



## Blade (Aug 22, 2015)

danielstj said:


> Hackers are nasty.



My impression is that this was some sort of 'inside job' rather than hacker activity as such.#-oThere seems to be nothing in it for the intruder, at least $$ wise, and it certainly had endured for a considerable period of time without incident.

I would bet this was 'disgruntled employee' stuff of some sort.:encouragement:


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 22, 2015)

Internet Karma at its finest. I have zero sympathy for any of the participants. It's like going to the Bunny Ranch in NV, where prostitution is legal, then complaining that you brought home an STD. Actions have consequences.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 22, 2015)

Now that I have 5 minutes instead of the 1 I had for my first comment, let me add that this kind of hacking is horrible and I have great sympathy for those involved.

My wife's aunts and uncles on her mom's side are a mess. There's nasty divorces and worse for all of them, except for one uncle. The guy and his wife have to be nearing their 50th anniversary. I gather he's had the same woman in the side the entire time. Everyone knows about the affair, and many disapprove, but everyone involved seems happy as can be with the setup. If it works for them, it's not my concern.

One of the many problems with the Ashley Madison hack is that a spouse who doesn't mind the affair but wants discretion now has to worry about aloof this going public.

I also hate, hate, HATE the "cheater" moniker for someone who has an affair. You can cheat at a competition, but marriage isn't a contest. No one wins or loses in a marriage. It's not a zero-sum arrangement. I know that's been the terminology for a long time, but it really rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## ppsage (Aug 22, 2015)

I don't see the effect of the hack as outing the persons involved in the affairs. Maybe I'm not easily titillated. I actually see it as a sort of legitimization. Lots of people do it, is the message. That's how you change values in a market economy, by what everybody does. I think the actual target is those who are self-righteous about infidelity. The target is people who say same sex relationships are the thing destroying marriage. The target is people whose morality is steeped in hypocrisy.


----------



## aj47 (Aug 22, 2015)

Sam said:


> Rule number one of the Internet: if you are going to join a dodgy site, of whatever variety, have some frigging common sense and don't use your own personal e-mail. In fact, don't use any e-mail that contains your own name. Logic one-oh-one.



It's also payment records. Those tend to have real names and billing addresses.  Unless ...



InstituteMan said:


> I also hate, hate, HATE the "cheater" moniker for someone who has an affair. You can cheat at a competition, but marriage isn't a contest. No one wins or loses in a marriage. It's not a zero-sum arrangement. I know that's been the terminology for a long time, but it really rubs me the wrong way.



What word would you use?  "Cheat(ing)" is used for other kinds of dishonesty, not just in sporting circles. Fake drug tests, plagiarism, conmanship, cutting corners--all are covered by the "cheat(ing)" verb.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 23, 2015)

astroannie said:


> What word would you use?  "Cheat(ing)" is used for other kinds of dishonesty, not just in sporting circles. Fake drug tests, plagiarism, conmanship, cutting corners--all are covered by the "cheat(ing)" verb.



I know I'm tilting at a windmill on this one, but I wouldn't call those general instances of dishonesty "cheating." 

I'm more ardent in my (likely pointless) opposition to the "cheating" terminology in the relationship context than others because I think viewing a relationship as a zero-sum arrangement is destructive. I also think that over-devotion to following rules in a relationship (as opposed to adapting expectations and behavior to what is best for those involved) is damaging, especially when those rules come from outside the relationship. 

The "cheating" phrasing frames attitudes toward relationships in the worst possible way, IMO. I'm not likely to convince society at large to change how we talk about such things, but I can at least gripe on the interwebs. :encouragement:


----------



## TJ1985 (Aug 23, 2015)

InstituteMan said:


> I know I'm tilting at a windmill on this one, but I wouldn't call those general instances of dishonesty "cheating."
> 
> I'm more ardent in my (likely pointless) opposition to the "cheating" terminology in the relationship context than others because I think viewing a relationship as a zero-sum arrangement is destructive. I also think that over-devotion to following rules in a relationship (as opposed to adapting expectations and behavior to what is best for those involved) is damaging, especially when those rules come from outside the relationship.
> 
> The "cheating" phrasing frames attitudes toward relationships in the worst possible way, IMO. I'm not likely to convince society at large to change how we talk about such things, but I can at least gripe on the interwebs. :encouragement:



I'd like to apologize for my choice of term. Infidelity is a far better term...


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 23, 2015)

TJ1985 said:


> I'd like to apologize for my choice of term. Infidelity is a far better term...



No apologies needed, TJ. It's the societal approach that bothers me. The language just reflects that approach, is all. I figure in my own small way I can agitate for a more considered approach.


----------



## dale (Aug 23, 2015)

once upon a time, i had a website. i said a lot of controversial things on this once upon a time website.
the group "anonymous" did a number on me over it and started putting my name out (my real name, which wasn't
attached to the website). my name started going out on the net calling me things like "rabid kahanist" and "nazi". (how
they can call me a jew supporter and a nazi at the same time? i'll never know). but in the end? i just wrote their hacking
defamation crap off as "publicity". my site became more popular than ever after they pulled that shit. they are not 
gonna win this lawsuit. all they are doing is giving her site global high volume publicity.


----------



## Kevin (Aug 23, 2015)

I wonder what the motivation is. Same as the SONY debacle. Who gains what? Self-serving tattle-tales because they're little 'b's? What? Yeah, there's douchy spouses out there, so? What biz is it of theirs? They're going to out them because A.M. wasn't able to or didn't erase customer names like they charged $20 to? It's not making sense. What are they, the personal-life morality police?


----------



## Blade (Aug 25, 2015)

In any case this published intrusion seems to have some nasty spin-off. As far as i can see the police have zero tolerance for such activity but do not seem to know at this point 'who dunnit'.#-oYou really have to wonder if the perpetrators had any idea what they were doing.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...linked-to-breach-toronto-police-say-1.3201432

Legal wrangles as well.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...-sued-in-us-over-data-breach/article26090077/


----------



## Bishop (Aug 25, 2015)

Oh, they had a fantastic idea. And it's working.

See... they not only released the information, but they made it accessible to the deep web, which MOST people don't know how to navigate. Those that DO are currently sending emails to the people on the site informing them that they have 30 days to send $450 in bitcoins to a certain bitcoin account, or the information will be sent to their spouse. With the millions of users on Ashley Madison, it's been estimated that if they get just .1% of those people to pay, they'll make over $1.6 million. Moreover, I think it was also a jab to AM itself, because the site prohibited the deletion of accounts unless users paid a fee; some hackers do this in their spare time literally just to poke at the giants they don't like.

The Sony hack was a different beast; but the outcome is similar. Those that perpetrated the hack likely only made the data public that they wanted to. The rest of it was sold to Sony competitors... classic corporate espionage. 

Personally, I've worked in IT a while now, and even do a bit of white-hat hacking at my job, and I can tell you this: 1) It's easier than it looks, just time consuming, and 2) Anyone putting live info on the web about things they don't want to get caught in (crime, infidelity, etc...), they have no one to blame but themselves when it blows up. The internet is the wild west, there's no doubt about that in today's society. Stepping into a world like Ashley Madison, a site where their #1 product is secrecy, is like painting a big red bullseye on your ass.

As for cheating itself... if that's your thing, whatever. But if you ask me, it's easier and cleaner to just break up with someone if you're lacking intimacy. Divorce, kids, marriage... whatever. It's all less damaging to be upfront and break it off than for them to find out when the blackmailers email your family with the truth. If you're not strong enough to tell the truth, you shouldn't have stepped up to the altar and lied in the first place.


----------



## Kevin (Aug 25, 2015)

What happens when your wife's hoo-hoo grows teeth, hmm? I didn't sign up for that. Yes, they made a G.D. movie about it, and no, we did not agree to it.... It's been 40-odd years and I, we, have a lot to loose. Now, then if everything is kept on the QT there's no issue. Our issue (together) will still inherit the assets, they won't be drained off by blood-sucking pieces of scum known as lawyers, her mother, Queen Royale, stays happy, her father, Mister Explosive-Anger-possibly homicidal, AND with a lovely heart condition, which if activated/stimulated/terminated would devastate all of the above remains calm (at least as far this subject goes) and you want me to just come out with it, chips fall where they may? No sir, I did not know better... at the time, there was no full disclosure, and I was meant to suffer alone with this, sometimes-companion not really a part of it. I will keep my private affairs private and allow the entirety of South-Western Saskatchewan, parts of the Eastern Seaboard, and Huntley Hall to remain stabile, while preventing the aggravation of hostilities between several small nations on several continents, and one medium-sized principality... thank you very much, mr. computer that wears tennis shoes, indeed *pfff* as if there were never any complications other than a simple divorce because someone was a player, as if things never change, never come about because of evolving, extenuating circumstances, consequences be damned. Here's a match... you may smoke.


----------



## LeeC (Aug 25, 2015)

Pardon me, but isn't this whole thing a lark in that consenting adults are involved. It's akin to the risks one takes in many aspects of life, even everyday ones like driving a car, and especially ones that tickle societal morals. The web is certainly not a safe place to play by any means. But people get snared every day because they think the rewards outweigh the costs, their little heads, hubris, greed, whatever, getting the best of them.

What caught my attention is Bishop's (no offense bro) reference to the Deep Web and criminal intent along with possibly childish retribution. Individuals and companies have been working for over a decade on accessing web content that isn't linked in conventional (internet protocol) ways or is otherwise protected, and guess how much dirty laundry and mischief there is out there to get into. If the accessing parties and dissenters were any more "righteous" than the so-called offenders, they'd be going after real scum like those that access child porn sites. 

I won't get into the natural world correspondence because we like to think we're above such. 

Come on folks, you're all supposedly writers, so make a good story out of it like Annie did. Show your literary bone  

A couple prompts:

"_Life is nothing but a competition to be the criminal rather than the victim._"  ~  Bertrand Russell

"_Life is a predicament that precedes death._"  ~  Henry James


----------



## Kevin (Aug 26, 2015)

I was just kidding by the way. I really like Kurt Russell. His Disney stuff even. Okay, so maybe all of it. Poor Snookie... in denial.


----------



## Mike C (Aug 26, 2015)

I think there are multiple levels to this.

First off, AM have been exposed for being dishonest about deleting accounts (for which they charge a fee). Certain info is deleted, enough is retained (including credit card info) for deleted accounts to be de-anonymised. Boo-hoo, AM, I hope you go out of business.

AM made great claims about their site security, which have proven to be unfounded - for this they deserved to be exposed.

There are real victims in this - the ones being blackmailed, for starters. There has been at least one reported suicide so far. I have no real sympathy for those that have been exposed per se - if you cheat, you have to be prepared to get caught - but the exploitative sods trying to extort off the back of this are beyond the pale. 

I'm also curious to know how 'effective' the site actually is - I heard a report from an analyst (maybe another word for client?) that said basically if you contact a woman under 30, and she actually responds, the chances are very high that she will require remuneration for her company.


----------



## Blade (Aug 31, 2015)

Here is someone who thinks he knows what is going on here.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...y-madison-website-hack-was-an-inside-job.html

Edit. Not that it really matters but someone has taken the trouble to do a stats breakdown on AM. There does seem to be considerable difference in membership rates from place to place.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/ashley-madisons-members-numbers-090000972.html


----------



## PiP (Aug 31, 2015)

astroannie said:


> So, I don't care.  If your name is in there, it makes no never-mind to me.  I don't really get the glee people are expressing about the data being stolen & posted.


I never looked... Honest. BUT, I have been reliably informed that our village has the highest number of registrations in the whole of th Algarve!! Unfortunately, we no longer live in a society which believes in: what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors. 

Are these people just crazy or desperate?


----------



## Kevin (Aug 31, 2015)

> I'm also curious to know how 'effective' the site actually is -


 Uhhhm... 5 thousand 'women' to 31 million men. Talk about sloppy seconds. It just proves that the whole thing was a scam. Like 'Enzyte' , it doesn't work. I think the marketing was brilliant. The name (at least in the States) is innocuous, reminding one of... a bakery(?)  My wife says Ashley/Madison, those are stripper-names, but it honestly never occurred to me.

 Yet again, I imagine some (one of millions of-) shlub, talking online to some possible hook-up, which in reality is some doofus employee (pimply-faced teen-ager ?) posing as a perspective 'interest' (certainly not love). Haha... classic. Men are such dummies. 

Men... No, the rules physics have not changed and women can still get some _anytime they want_ without using anything (certainly not this web-site) _if it simply un-attached sex they want_. And men, don't be fooled, you freakin' fools, they almost NEVER want that, and there are ALWAYS complications when it comes to women, even if they swear up and down there won't be. Just ask a woman. You will be blackmailed; she will contact you/attempt to create some drama, and you will say _oh gawd, what did I do,_ and SHE (that one) will find out. Only if you are single would this work and you're not; that's why the site was so popular. Duhhh....

 Hahaha... yes, wee-man forever controls us. Better to go Shao-lin monk, and chop it off(but who can do that?).


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Aug 31, 2015)

I generally agree with the OP. These are consenting adults who can't even be sure are there for exactly what the site is meant for and you've just released all their personal information. However I would be lying if I said it's not some what satisfying to see some real hypocrites get outed.


----------



## Blade (Sep 1, 2015)

Is any news good news? According to AM business is great, 87,596 'women' signed up since the security break.

http://www.therecord.com/news-story/5822310-87-596-women-sign-up-at-ashley-madison-since-hack/

Its a bit early in the morning and I can't think of a comment to make on this.:upset:


----------



## dither (Sep 1, 2015)

OMG,

I so want to comment on this but i don't dare.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 1, 2015)

Heh. I guess one more lie won't matter. AM is done. The CEO bailed days ago. Any leftover workers are stealing the office supplies. Grab a laptop; grab several. There'll be no bonus this year.


----------



## dither (Sep 1, 2015)

AM isn't "done" i would respectfully suggest.

It's merely a reality check.


Get real i say.


----------



## LeeC (Sep 1, 2015)

Blade said:


> Is any news good news? According to AM business is great, 87,596 'women' signed up since the security break.
> 
> http://www.therecord.com/news-story/5822310-87-596-women-sign-up-at-ashley-madison-since-hack/
> 
> Its a bit early in the morning and I can't think of a comment to make on this.:upset:



It strikes me that some portion of those women, being made aware of the site's existence, could be sleuthing their husband's activities


----------



## Blade (Sep 1, 2015)

LeeC said:


> It strikes me that some portion of those women, being made aware of the site's existence, could be sleuthing their husband's activities



A most cheerful and optimistic suggestion.:eagerness: In my dark and dour manner I merely assumed they would have been decoys of some sort.:stupid:


----------



## LeeC (Sep 1, 2015)

Brings to mind the following:

"A woman's guess is much more accurate than a man's certainty."  ~  Rudyard Kipling

"Once a woman has forgiven her man, she must not reheat his sins for breakfast."  ~  Marlene Dietrich


"The silliest woman can manage a clever man; but it needs a very clever woman to manage a fool."  ~  Rudyard Kipling


----------

