Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

troyhunt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#181

Post by angersock »

icebraining wrote: post #179
angersock wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a curious thing--from observation, I note that poly (along with a lot of other non-normal personality traits) tends to be notably prevalent in the tech and academic sectors. It is an open question whether this is because there's simply more visibility, or something else. There's also a decent amount of it in the kink sub-communities. I have a hunch that it may be a byproduct of the ongoing evolution of the datin…

I'd say that belonging to the polyamourous community is more likely to limit you in the "dating marketplace" than giving you more options. You're essentially excluding the vast majority of the population, which is very much not OK with it.

Well, yes and no, right? It's a smaller marketplace, but theoretically one with more chances to connect with people, because the resources are being more fully utilized and distributed.

And yes, the vocabulary here is somewhat on purpose. I think it's easy to argue that, if you're willing to treat the whole thing as matching providers and consumers, the poly approach is a strictly better marketplace than mainstream dating. Somewhat comically: the odds are good, but the goods are odd. :)

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#182

Post by Frondo »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #173
Frondo wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I care about cheating because it tells me that the person is OK with lying to people close to them. If they're OK lying to their spouse, my concern is that they're also OK lying to a customer. If people want to have an open marriage or practice polyamory, fine, that's entirely up to them. The deception is the thing here that is problematic.

What about closeted gays and others who are forced to be deceptive? I lie about my religious views because you can't be an atheist where I'm at. etc, etc. There's so much white-lying going on that its ridiculous to hold it up to some standard or pretend it means anything. >my concern is that they're also OK lying to a customer. This is ridiculous. Do you really think the CEO's sex life translates directly to the prod…

I think very few people would consider cheating on one's spouse or partner to be a form of white lying.

I also do business with a lot more people where I'm doing business with the owner themselves. If I'm looking someone in the eye and shaking their hand to do a deal, and then they turn around and lie to their spouse (someone they ostensibly owe a lot more to than me), that's hard for me to reconcile.

Maybe you don't care, and that's fine. I do. I find it hard to trust people who cheat. Why would I be treated differently or better than a spouse? (Again, open marriage/polyamory/whatever is a different story.)

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#183

Post by logfromblammo »

myth_buster wrote: post #111

So got a call, from our church leaders yesterday, saying my husband's work email was on [redacted], oh my! This is extremely irresponsible and repulsive! I'm surprised that some organizations can take the liberty to encroach onto people's personal lives!

If I got a call from a church, bearing gossip for the purposes of sowing discord in my family, I would have an important conversation with my spouse about immediately ending our relationship... with that church.

If you value families, you should not go around hammering wedges into every crack you find in them.

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#184

Post by JohnBooty »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #152
JohnBooty wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did they say that made them sound bitter? When they bemoaned the state of male/female relationships and claimed that females somehow dominate men who are anything less than "perfect." That sounded very bitter to me.

There are definite gender imbalances in our society. Is someone bitter when they point out that women make less or that men die more at work? Or is it particular to relationship issues? I wouldn't call Clinton pointing out the wage gap as her being bitter. Is it perhaps some view that those who complain about social relationship norms are generally those not in, but wishing to be in, such relationships?

   There are definite gender imbalances in our society. Is someone 
   bitter when they point out that women make less or that men die 
   more at work?  [...] I wouldn't call Clinton pointing out the wage 
   gap as her being bitter.
Those are objective facts, backed by statistics. Completely different than:

   For a man, unless they are handsome, wealthy and well endowed (i.e. 
   perfect) then they are at the mercy of women
If that doesn't sound bitter to you, see a therapist.

Myself and plenty of other men I know, who are far from this definition of "perfect," manage to have perfectly healthy relationships with women in which nobody is at anybody else's mercy.

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#185

Post by myko »

pjc50 wrote: post #136
Symmetry wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the things I really like about Google, that they have a team that's explicitly working to make it easier to take your data out and move to a different service. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Data_Liberation_Front

.. and delete it from Google afterwards?

Yes, of course, that is a major goal of Google's DLF.

http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/09/introducing-d... http://dataliberation.blogspot.com/

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#186

Post by kolinko »

logfromblammo wrote: post #158
3pt14159 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to be far more paranoid. When Ashley Madison's parent company tried to hire me I obviously said "no", but I also became curious about their site from a different perspective (I wanted to check out their technology). But I created a one time use email address to check it out.

Sometimes, I even use nonce email addresses with non-vice-based businesses. For anything potentially embarrassing or blackmailable, I believe I would have to create an entirely separate and strictly segregated identity for each one, even just for "evaluation". Practically everyone has had a data breach by now. It's well past time to start acquiring data-protection habits to practice before going out on the Internet.

that's what mailinator.com is :)

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#187

Post by kzhahou »

logfromblammo wrote: post #158
3pt14159 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to be far more paranoid. When Ashley Madison's parent company tried to hire me I obviously said "no", but I also became curious about their site from a different perspective (I wanted to check out their technology). But I created a one time use email address to check it out.

Sometimes, I even use nonce email addresses with non-vice-based businesses. For anything potentially embarrassing or blackmailable, I believe I would have to create an entirely separate and strictly segregated identity for each one, even just for "evaluation". Practically everyone has had a data breach by now. It's well past time to start acquiring data-protection habits to practice before going out on the Internet.

Indeed. Only a matter of time before reddit and hackernews get dumped. That's be fun (esp. reddit)

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#188

Post by Lawtonfogle »

adriand wrote: post #169
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be appropriate here when very few people hold such a view? A lot of people say they don't judge others and think judging others is wrong, but they are always limited in scope to some subset of judgments. They will often be quick to judge a thief or worse who is on the stand. In the original story this quote comes from, the one guilty was to be stoned to death because they had committed a crime deserving…

> the one guilty was to be stoned to death because they had committed a crime deserving the death penalty. In comparison to crimes with similar punishment today, how many would say to not judge a murderer unless you are blameless? Surely you are aware that the "crime deserving the death penalty", in this instance, was the "crime" of adultery. Based on that, I don't think your line of questioning holds up.

I don't see how our modern view of what was then a capital crime matters. When the quote was said, it was said to a group who were asking to carry out a death sentence for a capital crime. That is to say, the line of reasoning is that you should not carry out an execution for a capital crime unless you are without sin.

To insist that this quote only applies to adultery and not to other actions which different societies may or may not judge as capital crimes is about as meaningful as insisting that this literally means to not throw the first stone, but other punishments, including other means of execution, are allowed.

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#189

Post by JohnBooty »

vidarh wrote: post #153
JohnBooty wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a man, unless they are handsome, wealthy and well endowed (i.e. perfect) then they are at the mercy of women. This isn't true at all. I know plenty of average guys with great relationships. You're right about insecurity being a turnoff for most people, though.

It seems to me you ignored the following part. The point is unless you have attributes that scream "status" in some for or other, as a man you have to put in effort to find a partner that women are more likely to be able to avoid (that said: women who want good partners still have to put in a lot of effort too). Women have a whole different level of choice. Not necessarily good choices, but choice nonetheless. Just t…

Didn't ignore it.

Yes, in Western (or at least American) society men do tend to pursue women more actively than vice-versa. This is probably true in most cultures though I don't have firsthand experience.

No, you do not need to be "handsome, wealthy and well endowed (i.e. perfect)" in order to avoid being "at the mercy of women."

   Just try to put up a fake profile on a dating site as
   an experiment and see what ends up in your mailbox over  
   the course of a few days.
I ran a dating site, actually. Saw lots of guys who weren't "perfect" have a great time and find success in relationships. Me included.

Re: Here’s what Ashley Madison members have told me

#190

Post by LesZedCB »

angersock wrote: post #172
LesZedCB wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a part of the polyamorous (not totally distinct, but not the same as polygamy) culture, and I think it is slowly gaining some momentum. I'm not convinced it will ever see mainstream acceptance (who knows, LGBTQ+ people somewhat enjoy that now), but I think that it's a valid way to live life and enjoy romance and relationships. I have been with my current partner for 2 years, and we have both dated other people s…

It's a curious thing--from observation, I note that poly (along with a lot of other non-normal personality traits) tends to be notably prevalent in the tech and academic sectors. It is an open question whether this is because there's simply more visibility, or something else. There's also a decent amount of it in the kink sub-communities. I have a hunch that it may be a byproduct of the ongoing evolution of the datin…

I have actually noticed that as well. Almost all of my metamours have been in the tech sector.
Post reply on HN