And that’s why I used the words “That a majority of” instead of “all of.” Some of them probably are real. Most of them, however, are not. Sure, there’s some that are unlikely to be fake - but, that changes literally nothing about what I said.
The things that worry me more isn’t the worry about a connection from A-B which is painfully obvious, but the connections A-b-c-d-e-F that are obviously made in the intelligence world with multiple sources of intel. The joke is that no one even concerns themselves about A-B in the general public…and few contemplate what is known by hackers or govt. sources that leads to the A…F connections.
Was that really necessary? We were having a nice civil discussion up to that point.
1 Like
That depends - Would it bother you less if I described it in a more flowery way, rather than being blunt? It’s still the same statement, just half a dozen words longer, and slightly prettier. And probably more offensive to be honest, I’m not terribly good at all that, it tends to come off even worse.
Maybe not the Chinese. But Experian did.
1 Like
I know one guy who claimed great success from AM. He was probably lying or at least exaggerating about his results but he eventually fell into a relationship with a woman married to the pastor of a large local church. They met through AM.
They had one of the most fucked up relationships I have ever heard of. She was physically abusive to him and he was slowly turning her into an alcoholic/drug addict. They both have kids. Whole thing was a fucking mess.
I’m not sure how I feel about this data breach other than to say that it is fascinating how tech has enabled an instantaneous illumination of an irrepressibly ugly side of human relationships over such a massive chunk of the population. Also this should serve as a wake-up call to everyone who interacts with the internet in a significant matter. People have been saying it for decades now, but few seem to really be listening. Nothing you do on the internet, and increasingly AFK, is private.
I suspect that relatively few innocents will be caught up in this. Swingers have their own sites and quite frankly they are, for the most part, already pretty out in the open. It’s part of the swinger lifestyle.
As to your second example, that’s not how abusive relationships work. People in abusive marriages develop a fear of extramarital interaction. Generally, they suffer some horrific consequences when they are caught even talking casually to someone else. I guarantee they aren’t signing up to some website so they can hook up on the sly.
2 Likes
When are we going to get the great merging of AM and Trump stories?
Surely it’s inevitable.
2 Likes
That is a common pattern. It’s not a rule handed down from the Abusive Relationships Council. Not all abusive relationships are abusive in the same way.
As long as it has spikes machined into one surface and I can clip it to my baseball hat as a personal defence weapon…
Then you should take every opportunity to practice.
Making the Ashley Madison dump public has killed its value for blackmail so I don’t see how it could be used for espionage.
1 Like
Yes, that’s what I meant. Obviously there are women out there who would use it “legitimately”, but in my own limited experience, if there is a majority difference between men and women it is this; women start to think of affairs when they meet a man to whom they are attracted, men start to think of affairs first and then go looking for women. I suspect as Western society develops this observation will weaken because I think it’s mainly cultural.
If you look at the proportion of women execs in large tech companies, it is not so different from the proportion of women supposed to be using AM. That is anecdotal but suggestive (and against my earlier suggestion).
Whatever the case, I suspect that a number of PhDs in sociology will eventually result from all this.
1 Like
See above.
It’s not like it matters either way - If you’re a bastard, you’re a bastard.
If you’re particularly nice, go out of your way, even, the other guy - if you’re telling him he’s wrong - is just going to accuse you of being a condescending bastard instead, because they don’t care, they just want you to be an arsehole to justify dismissing you.
Why waste the time on fake politeness that’ll just be twisted into an attack or dismissal? Easier to just be slightly dissembling about how good or bad you are at things if confronted, and leave them nowhere to go on that tack, without looking like a twat.
That doesn’t change the fact that you are making up scenarios to fit how you want to feel about this. Point of fact: the situation you described where an abused person in a terrible marriage was going to AM for help is laughable. Improbable in the extreme. You are making things up to fit your view.
Anyone can do this. How about this. This infodump is going to do more good than harm. This is going to end marriages that should have been ended long ago. That can only have a net positive as people will move on and find happiness in healthier relationships.
That scenario is a whole lot more likely than ANYTHING you proposed but it’s still bullshit. WE DONT KNOW what the effects of this will be. End of story.
How incredibly juvenile.
Civilized discussion != “fake politeness”.
And end marriages that were recoverable. Statistics from Relate in the UK show that a much higher percentage of people referred to them think that their marriages are at an end than is actually the case.
1 Like
Weev’s already going after .gov addresses.
Ugh, the latest in the tone policing parade appears. Nothing like the Internet’s favorite way to win an argument. What’s next, you’re going to pull out that tired old saw of “Oh, you’re getting emotional, so you lose, I win, neener neener neener?”
Standing about slinging dirt and schoolyard gossip, and you’re going about twisting words and calling people juvenile? Spare me.
1 Like
