Did you know the hackers then tried to blackmail each member individually? Morality never entered into it. They found a giant group of cashed up people to target who would largely choose not to defend themselves. Good guy hackers my ass.
Did it fail? They would have only needed to persuade a small percentage of the members to pay up, and they would have found themselves with a couple of millions dollars in bitcoins
I wouldnt necessarily call it black mail although it is they are just offering the same service AM offered for a higher price but actually do it. They are basically giving them one last chance to redact their profile...
Do they seem like very trustworthy people to you?
Besides, the difference is that AM was failing to provide a service for which they'd been paid; they were never threatening to publicise sensitive information. "Give me money or I'll do X to hurt you" is blackmail. I don't think there's any confusion about that.
▼
deleted
· 8 years ago
All im saying is they gave the people one last chance to not have it exposed and to me it is karma are the people using AM trustworthy? probably not since they were using the site. And a little side note. The impact team (hackers) posted yhe info on the deepweb most people wouldnt know how to find it.
At the risk of this conversation blowing out:
* they gave the people one last chance to not have it exposed - *by them*. The people wouldn't have been in this situation if it hadn't been for the hackers in the first place
* I've said this elsewhere, but there were plenty of singles and people in open relationships using that site. AM is built on a disgusting premise, but many members were legit
* The hackers posted info on the deep web knowing that it was valuable enough that it would be only a matter of days before it was retrieved and made public
I don't mean to defend AM. There's a lot of bullshit talk about ethics going on about this, and I think the mob mentality that wants to attack the members for having used the site in the first place is *exactly* the reason that they felt the need to use an anonymous service in the first place - our culture is so insistent on uphold monogamy as a virtue even in the face of endless proof that many, many people are not monogamous by nature.
▼
deleted
· 8 years ago
Im just keeping a dialogue going with you a discussion if you will. The people who are single and in open relationships wouldnt have anything to worry about being exposed right? Either way you look at it the hackers have taught a valuable lesson to society now its up to society to learn from it. Anything you put on the internet be it public or private can be exposed and used against you. While they may not have been good guy hackers i for one look at the brighter side and see that they have essentially shut down a disgusting website that promotes immoral values. Were talking about a site that had huges advertisements in time square and other very populated places. And i also see some good in exposing its users because some were actually breaking the law and have to answer for it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and i am not trying to convince you to see it my way and i respect your view on it also.
deleted
· 8 years ago
I also would like to thank you for linking me to your source of the blackmail aspect of it. Until you mentioned it i was unaware of the blackmailing. And for having a conversation on the subject rather than a shouting match or argument.
The site was huge because demand was huge. We please ourselves to insist that polygamy is immoral, but 30 million people obviously don't feel that way. The stigma about it means that yes, single people etc do have to worry, because their names are now publicly associated with this "disgusting website that promotes immoral values".
I have an open marriage. My wife knows I'm on the site - but her parents don't. My employer doesn't, our friends don't. Now tell me - should I shell out $100 to an anonymous extortionist in hopes they'll prove honourable? AM is awful but its users, whatever you might think of them, have been violated.
You said "tried". That implies failure.
http://infidelityrecoveryinstitute.com/2015/08/26/the-ashley-madison-extortion-continues/
Besides, the difference is that AM was failing to provide a service for which they'd been paid; they were never threatening to publicise sensitive information. "Give me money or I'll do X to hurt you" is blackmail. I don't think there's any confusion about that.
* they gave the people one last chance to not have it exposed - *by them*. The people wouldn't have been in this situation if it hadn't been for the hackers in the first place
* I've said this elsewhere, but there were plenty of singles and people in open relationships using that site. AM is built on a disgusting premise, but many members were legit
* The hackers posted info on the deep web knowing that it was valuable enough that it would be only a matter of days before it was retrieved and made public
I don't mean to defend AM. There's a lot of bullshit talk about ethics going on about this, and I think the mob mentality that wants to attack the members for having used the site in the first place is *exactly* the reason that they felt the need to use an anonymous service in the first place - our culture is so insistent on uphold monogamy as a virtue even in the face of endless proof that many, many people are not monogamous by nature.
I have an open marriage. My wife knows I'm on the site - but her parents don't. My employer doesn't, our friends don't. Now tell me - should I shell out $100 to an anonymous extortionist in hopes they'll prove honourable? AM is awful but its users, whatever you might think of them, have been violated.