# Ashley Maddison Hack - WDYT?



## Warrigal (Jul 25, 2015)

I have a puritanical streak that I struggle with at times but when it comes to Ashley Madison I don't even try. I'm affronted by a site that facilitates cheating by marrieds but then I am a very old fashioned girl.

The fact that the site has been hacked and the clients personal details may be exposed doesn't concern me at all but perhaps I should be worried. There are things in this article that could be important to other sites we visit.

WDYT?

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/20/9007039/ashley-madison-hack-explained


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 25, 2015)

I think that the hack and subsequent blackmail is more morally repugnant than the content of the site itself. It has the potential to expand into other areas of society such as religion and politics.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 25, 2015)

I agree about the blackmail bit but religion and politics? Explain this leap of logic please.

It certainly has the potential to reveal just how insecure any website can be. 
I thought the weak link about paying to have your data deleted but paying for it with a credit card is worth paying attention to.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 25, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I agree about the blackmail bit but religion and politics? Explain this leap of logic please.



If a site is hacked because the hackers disagree with the morality of it, then sites that advocate alternative beliefs of _any_ type are fair game. 



> It certainly has the potential to reveal just how insecure any website can be.



Not sure what level of security they had, though - but yes, the potential is always there. The same old cops and robbers routine ...



> I thought the weak link about paying to have your data deleted but paying for it with a credit card is worth paying attention to.



They're cheaters - I doubt they're rocket scientists.


----------



## fishfulthinking (Jul 27, 2015)

I like to think of the Hack as a kind of Karma.

I think the whole idea of this site (A.M. that is) is garbage.  I wonder do "members" pay money to join?


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

Hmmmm.

Yes, I’ve seen interviews with the owner of Ashley Madison and members do pay – and the fee is not cheap. Using such a site to get some nookie is pretty pathetic. But people connect via personal ads and various internet sites every day - for free.

I don’t like the idea of the hack and blackmail. Moral police and extortionists….ugh. So they are cheaters – they are what they are. That’s their spouse’s problem.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> ... I don’t like the idea of the hack and blackmail.  Moral police and extortionists….ugh.



Exactly. That was the point I was trying to show - thank you. Even if they deserve it, they don't deserve it.


----------



## AZ Jim (Jul 27, 2015)

No good guys here. *AZ Jim handing out black hats to all*


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Exactly. That was the point I was trying to show - thank you. Even if they deserve it, they don't deserve it.



And who the hell are hackers to say "I don't like what you're doing.  Pay me or I'll tell." ?
fff:  Gimme a break.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> And who the hell are hackers to say "I don't like what you're doing.  Pay me or I'll tell." ?
> fff:  Gimme a break.



They're probably the same ones who screamed in diners as children and now park illegally in handicapped parking spaces.


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

:lofl:


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> And who the hell are hackers to say "I don't like what you're doing.  Pay me or I'll tell." ?
> fff:  Gimme a break.



For clarity, the hackers aren't asking for money.


----------



## AZ Jim (Jul 27, 2015)

Money or no money.  The hackers are wrong.  Moral principles for violating laws by hacking doesn't excuse them.  They may be convinced "god told me to do this", but so have hundreds of murders tried to tell us that was justification for their acts.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

Did the hackers mention God? Or are they questioning the ethics of Ashley Madison's business model ?
I hear the hackers saying that they are defrauding their customers by guaranteeing a level of security that they can't deliver.

I doubt that they are expecting AM to cease business but they may be looking for a career in cyber security. 
Hackers often land on their feet this way.


----------



## Kitties (Jul 27, 2015)

Why get married if this is what you have to do.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

Why would you trust a firm to act ethically with your personal information when their business model promotes breaking the trust of your life partner?
It makes as much sense as trusting a pimp or a drug dealer with your wallet.


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

Anyone can "promote" anything.  I can tell a bunch of people it will be fun for them to go cheat on their spouses, and if they do who is at fault?  Me?  I think not.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> Anyone can "promote" anything.  I can tell a bunch of people it will be fun for them to go cheat on their spouses, and if they do who is at fault?  Me?  I think not.



I see your point about the cheaters but what about the business model that charges money for facilitating their weakness ? 
For the record, I'm not impressed by the business model of online betting agencies either. I see them as vultures feeding on the weak.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jul 27, 2015)

People have been cheating since the beginning of time..  Social Media is just another means to a desired end..  Where there's a will there's a way


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

I see I'm on my own here. 

I still think fidelity and loyalty within marriage should be encouraged and supported by society, not attacked for profit.


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I see I'm on my own here.
> 
> I still think fidelity and loyalty within marriage should be encouraged and supported by society, not attacked for profit.




Step down a few notches, DW.

You are certainly not the only person who feels that fidelity and loyalty should be promoted. Ashley Madison (which is a Canadian based service) does not speak for or represent everyone.

Unfortunately, no one person or group of people can dictate or control what ‘society’ does. Adults want what they want, and they will do whatever they want to do.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> Step down a few notches, DW.



Shan't. I stand fast on this one. I'm not dictating, just expressing myself.
Madison Ashley's business model is monumentally unethical

*Ethical principles include:*


Beneficence - to do good.
Non-maleficence - to do no harm.
Respect for Autonomy.
Fairness.
Truthfulness.
Justice.

And the good they do is? They make profit?

They advertise that they strengthen marriages which brings us to item #5. Are they wilfully deceiving customers? Also, it is reported that many of the female clients on show aren't real? Elements of a scam? 

Do no harm? They claim that they are protecting their clients by maintaining their anonymity but it would seem that they have failed in this respect. A lot of marriages are now at risk. Are they blameless for any adverse outcome for their clients? 

Truthfulness? T'd like to see the contract that clients agree to when they sign up. Is AM upfront about the risks?

Fairness? To whom? Their customers? Given that the site is specifically for married people, are they being fair to the others in the marriages - the spouse, the children?

Justice? Well, I guess they are within the law.


In the end, I have nothing but contempt for the whole enterprise. 
Now I taken it up a few notches and I'd better rest my case before I have an apoplexy.


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Shan't. I stand fast on this one. I'm not dictating, just expressing myself.
> Madison Ashley's business model is monumentally unethical
> 
> [snip].



You’ll *have* to (step down). Your “I must be alone” or whatever is *inaccurate*. You can stand by your ethics …that’s fine, :shrug: but it's beside the point. We're talking biscuits vs bread. You're acting like everyone is saying "Hey! What's the big deal? I think adultery is great!" You're trying to put words into various mouths, and it's not working.

I never said AM was ethical, and I’m not seeing where anyone else did. I also don’t need you to explain ethics (and I don't think anyone else in the thread does), especially in such a haughty tone.


----------



## tnthomas (Jul 27, 2015)

I thought that all the cheaters and seekers of 'other' ****** encounters congregated on Craigslist, which is free.  ?


----------



## applecruncher (Jul 27, 2015)

Yeah, but craigslist isn't ethical.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> You’ll *have* to (step down). Your “I must be alone” or whatever is *inaccurate*. You can stand by your ethics …that’s fine, :shrug: but it's beside the point. We're talking biscuits vs bread. You're acting like everyone is saying "Hey! What's the big deal? I think adultery is great!" You're trying to put words into various mouths, and it's not working.
> 
> I never said AM was ethical, and I’m not seeing where anyone else did. I also don’t need you to explain ethics (and I don't think anyone else in the thread does), especially in such a haughty tone.



I will reread my posts but I have not accused anyone of thinking that adultery is great. It's Ashley Madison that attracts my ire because it celebrates adultery. This is not an ordinary hook up service - its targeted demographic is marrieds. I've seen the adverts on late night TV. 

Apologies for the haughtiness.

My reference to ethics is because I don't regard this as a religious issue. It is an ethical one but not everyone understands what ethical thinking actually involves. It complex and I have to remind myself of the principles too.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

tnthomas said:


> I thought that all the cheaters and seekers of 'other' ****** encounters congregated on Craigslist, which is free.  ?


OK, I had a look at Craigslist, and apparently it is available in Sydney but I had to do a lot of work to do dig down. Many clicks and a Google map of the world to navigate. It's not reaching out to me through my TV and doesn't seem to want just married people. Also, it's not very appealing.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 27, 2015)

applecruncher said:


> Yeah, but craigslist isn't ethical.



Perhaps not but it does seem more honest.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 27, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I see your point about the cheaters but what about the business model that charges money for facilitating their weakness ?



You mean like Nutrisystem, Weight Watchers and such? Fast-food franchises? Exotic sports cars? 

Many businesses are based upon profiting from weakness - I worked in such a field for many years - self-defense training.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 28, 2015)

Does one form of exploitation excuse all others and is there a continuum of exploitation ? Or a field with harm/exploitation on one axis and benefit on the other. If there is, it would be possible to plot such businesses in quadrants marked - more good than harm, more harm than good, don't go there, etc. 

Something like this


From my perspective, Ashley Madison is in the red zone. Others will see it differently of course. Weight Watchers I'd put in either mauve or green and fast food in mauve or red.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jul 28, 2015)

I heard that there were 38 million subscribers!


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 28, 2015)

That's an interesting way of looking at it - I like that it includes several gray zones.

Still, isn't the particular box we put the business in question into colored by our perceptions? 

For example, you place fast food into red. While I could almost agree with you, I would have to stop and think about all the people that live exclusively on a fast-food diet because they cannot afford anything more. Certainly that has some benefits? 

Please don't ask me what benefits AM serves - there must be some, it's just too early in the AM to think of them.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jul 28, 2015)

Cheating has probably been with us since Adam and Eve after Sam and Marie were created...


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 28, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> That's an interesting way of looking at it - I like that it includes several gray zones.
> 
> Still, isn't the particular box we put the business in question into colored by our perceptions?
> 
> ...



Yes, it is up to each individual to decide where they place the internal lines. There could be more gradations than just two on each axis. It was just an illustration concocted rather quickly to show how two competing values can be simultaneously addressed. For three values under consideration you need to think in 3D and plot them inside a box. Even then, the graphic doesn't make the decision for you. Ultimately you have to decide but the graphic may be an aid to clearer thinking.

If I had more internal divisions, I would probably place fast food somewhere between mauve and red - go there occasionally but not too often?


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 28, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> ... If I had more internal divisions, I would probably place fast food somewhere between mauve and red - go there occasionally but not too often?



Well, there you go - maybe these people only cheat on their spouses once in a while? 

I just go with the philosophy that nothing is entirely good or bad - that there are gradations in everything. With that approach I cannot in good faith totally condemn them.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 28, 2015)

You still seem to think I am condemning the clients. I'm not. I'm affronted by Ashley Madison itself that has a business plan that directly attacks marriage. Call me old fashioned but I still believe that the institution marriage should be supported, not white anted for profit. It is pure bunkum to pretend that their business is improving marriages.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 28, 2015)

Wouldn't it improve a marriage (if it is already failing) by ending it? 

And if you're affronted by the business plan, wouldn't you also be affronted by its participants?


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 28, 2015)

I am affronted by people who knowingly set their cap at married people.

Regarding the first question. I have always taken any solemn vow I have made very seriously. I always said that I wouldn't cheat on my husband. If the marriage was broken I would leave him first before I ever took up with someone else. I did contemplate leaving several times. Who doesn't at some time? I got over it and recommitted.

My mother had a saying that applied to family: blood relations and marrieds both - she said we stick like poo to a blanket. One way to describe loyalty and commitment, I suppose.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 28, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I am affronted by people who knowingly set their cap at married people.



So you're not fond of solicitors? 



> Regarding the first question. I have always taken any solemn vow I have made very seriously. I always said that I wouldn't cheat on my husband. If the marriage was broken I would leave him first before I ever took up with someone else. I did contemplate leaving several times. Who doesn't at some time? I got over it and recommitted.



All well and good - can you therefore have no mercy for a business that aims to help those that are "beyond hope"? 

... or am I painting a barn with a toothpick? 



> My mother had a saying that applied to family: blood relations and marrieds both - she said we stick like poo to a blanket. One way to describe loyalty and commitment, I suppose.



And a colorful one.


----------



## merlin (Jul 29, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Well, there you go - maybe these people only cheat on their spouses once in a while?
> 
> I just go with the philosophy that nothing is entirely good or bad - that there are gradations in everything. With that approach I cannot in good faith totally condemn them.



I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 29, 2015)

merlin said:


> I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.



And that's probably as simple and truthful a philosophy that you can find, in my opinion. :encouragement:


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 29, 2015)

merlin said:


> I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.



Sorry Merlin but I regard that as pure nonsense.

For example, if my neighbour throws trash on my lawn and I subsequently take a shotgun to his front window, am I to understand that my action is just a consequence of his action. It is not wrong from my point of view but he might think differently. Isn't that why we have laws to help and guide us?


----------



## merlin (Jul 29, 2015)

But that's all subjective Dame, as are any laws, you have free choice if you believe that, so if you break one of your cultures laws there will be consequences.

You calling my truth nonsense is subjective as is Phil's agreement of my truth, no one has "The" truth, there isn't any in the universe, as far as I am concerned.

We each as individuals make up our own truth as does our particular culture, they are all different, but none are "The" truth, because there isn't one. IMO


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 29, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> For example, if my neighbour throws trash on my lawn and I subsequently take a shotgun to his front window, am I to understand that my action is just a consequence of his action.



Yes it is, because had he NOT thrown the trash you probably would not have shot his window. Simple cause and effect. 



> It is not wrong from my point of view but he might think differently. Isn't that why we have laws to help and guide us?



Laws are merely the results of a few people's ideas on what is "right" and "wrong" - again, open to interpretation. They are accepted by the majority and enforced by a minority.


----------



## WhatInThe (Aug 19, 2015)

Get ready divorce lawyers. Hacked data now released/posted.

http://www.wired.com/2015/08/happened-hackers-posted-stolen-ashley-madison-data/


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 19, 2015)

32 million users - wow!


----------



## WhatInThe (Aug 19, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> 32 million users - wow!



Let's say just one million of those have a 200 dollar consultation with a lawyer. That's 200 million dollars for the lawyers. I guess that's one way to stimulate the economy.


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 19, 2015)

Hmm. Torn here, not pro adultery, monogamy, serial or otherwise works for me. But, in my view, the morality question is around the privacy issue. Hackers had no right to attempt to extort compliance. Adultery is not illegal. Re the all truths are subjective. Hmm. Slippery slope, I get free will and consequence. By the same token, I believe some truths to be universal. I believe it is wrong to abuse children etc. I am not an anarchist, and am not comfortable with the I can do whatever I wish philosophy. I think it is so easy to paint anything we don't like as a construct. I have never been anything but eccentric, have few absolutes, but there are one or two. Otherwise what is the point of any attempt to live a meaningful life?


----------



## applecruncher (Aug 19, 2015)

WhatInThe said:


> Let's say just one million of those have a 200 dollar consultation with a lawyer. That's 200 million dollars for the lawyers. I guess that's one way to stimulate the economy.



Turn off that calculator. Initial consultations are usually free.

1) btw, it should be kept in mind that many AM clients are women.

2) People who use AM services most likely have cheated before.

3) Do you really think as soon as a spouse finds out the other party has used AM they will run to a lawyer and prepare for a divorce? Mmmmm, some might but most.. probably not. Many people stay with an unfaithful spouse for any number of reasons.


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 19, 2015)

"Turn off that calculator. Initial consultations are usually free."

Maybe with personal injury lawyers, but NOT divorce lawyers.  Not around here, anyway.  AND, they usually want a fat retainer before they will tell you anything at all.


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 19, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> ... Adultery is not illegal ...



Actually, depending upon where you live you could pay a $10 misdemeanor fine or get up to three years in jail on a felony charge.




> Re the all truths are subjective. Hmm. Slippery slope, I get free will and consequence. By the same token, I believe some truths to be universal. I believe it is wrong to abuse children etc. I am not an anarchist, and am not comfortable with the I can do whatever I wish philosophy. I think it is so easy to paint anything we don't like as a construct. I have never been anything but eccentric, have few absolutes, but there are one or two. Otherwise what is the point of any attempt to live a meaningful life?



Hmph ... going to need time to digest all of those thoughts. :numbness:


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 19, 2015)

Phil, re adultery, are you speaking of certain areas of America? I know the Canadianim can't be charged/fined for such things but being rude is punishable by being banished to live with Ted Cruz!


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 19, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Phil, re adultery, are you speaking of certain areas of America? I know the Canadianim can't be charged/fined for such things but being rude is punishable by being banished to live with Ted Cruz!



Yes, I'm sorry, I was speaking of the U.S.


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 20, 2015)

No problem Phil.


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 20, 2015)

... but that's good to know about Canada ...


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 20, 2015)

You bet Phil, we are an immoral bunch up here, soooo sad. Sigh.


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 20, 2015)

Morals, schmorals - you make good maple syrup.


----------



## WhatInThe (Aug 22, 2015)

And right on que the lawsuits start rolling in.

http://abcnews.go.com/International...s-578m-canadian-class-action-lawsuit-33234548


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 22, 2015)

WhatInThe said:


> And right on que the lawsuits start rolling in.
> 
> http://abcnews.go.com/International...s-578m-canadian-class-action-lawsuit-33234548



Should we have expected anything less? 

The sun is shining for the ambulance chasers.


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 22, 2015)

Most unfaithful states of America: A new graph from the Ashley Madison site  show the state that spent the  most money on the adultery website per capita

​


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 22, 2015)

I view all hackers as lower than whale sh*t.  I don't care about the content of the site.  I hate the hacker not the site.


----------



## SifuPhil (Aug 22, 2015)

hollydolly said:


> Most unfaithful states of America: A new graph from the Ashley Madison site  show the state that spent the  most money on the adultery website per capita
> 
> ​



West Virginia is at the bottom only because they're already all married to their sisters. layful:


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 22, 2015)

post deleted


----------

