Wonder what this will do to the divorce rate …
-
@xaade said:
doing it wrong
Man I just had a mental vision of a dating site ran by Jeff *shudder*
For people who only want to have sex a specific way?
-
If I wasn't at work, there's a Ghastly comic that applies here...
-
@chubertdev said:
@codlnghorror's avatar
"No, no, Mom, you're doing it wrong!"
As seen in the Lounge ...
-
I remember the Lounge...
-
Buy your brain bleach nowTM
-
Interesting! This is what it is all about:
So got a call, from our church leaders yesterday, saying my husband's work email was on [redacted], oh my!
Hmm, I am sure the motives are selfless and these church leaders do not think about all the females (and boys) after the mass.
-
-
At least they used bcrypt?
-
-
3. In the back of a Volkswagen
-
Volkswagen doesn't allow to turn the internal light on and off?
-
Even if it didn't, the light would still either be on or off. But that's to the joke.
-
-
- Whoosh!
- Watch Mallrats.
-
Not the first time a Whoosh has been handed out for this, right @RaceProUK?
-
-
-
Also, notifications for the automated flag responses are broken AGAIN?!
-
They got fixed?
-
At least one of the times. I'm sure I logged it over on meta and it got unbroken temporarily.
-
At least they used bcrypt?
From the article:security professionals around the world are in almost unanimous agreement that passwords should never be stored in plaintext.
***Almost*** unanimous? I wonder which security professionals believe that it is acceptable to store passwords in plain text...
-
Almost unanimous? I wonder which security professionals believe that it is acceptable to store passwords in plain text...
The type that end up having front page articles written about them on the main site.
-
Almost unanimous? I wonder which security professionals believe that it is acceptable to store passwords in plain text...
http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTQxOTE2NDc0OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzg0MjI3NA@@.V1_SX640_SY720.jpg
-
Well this just got more (or maybe less) interesting. Turns out Ashley Madison was essentially a scam site for horny men.
Only 1,492 of the women in the database had ever checked their messages on the site. That's compared with more than 20 million men.
This confirms the claims of a Reddit user 3 years ago:
https://reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/pzl6v/iama_founder_of_the_infidelity_website_ashley/c3trn62There are few or no women on Ashley Madison. Ads and messages "from" women are in fact from employees of Ashley Madison.
The business model is fairly simple. The would-be adulterer buys the privilege of sending X messages, say 50 for $100. He uses them to respond to ads supposedly from women (unbeknownst to him, of course, they are just plants).
When he starts to run low, one of his messages will be answered. A woman who is, miraculously, exactly what he was looking for and lives nearby, will start up a conversation with him. Things will be looking really good just when he runs out of messages. He'll have to buy a whole new package of 50 or 100 but someone that women will never as responsive -- until he starts running low again.
Personally, I think it's a pretty sleazy business, but what the hell.
(No, I'm not a victim. I used to run an honest dating site.)
-
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ashley-madison-bunch-dudes-talking-233158251.html
Well this just got more (or maybe less) interesting. Turns out Ashley Madison was essentially a scam site for horny men.
NO WAY WHO COULD EVER HAVE SEEN THAT COMING?
@Lorne_Kates said:
And since it's core business model is "extract as much money from idiots as possible"...
Oh yeah. Any who can think more than one step in advance.
Admittedly, ACTIVELY stringing idiots along with timed messages from fake accounts-- vs. just having fake accounts to browse-- is a whole other level of scum shittery. But, given the company, I would not at all be surprised to find out that some of their premium services (such as the "pay us a whole bunch of extra money and we'll guarantee you have a fuck" were specifically crafted to lure in those with WAY more money than brains. And that they then took that money, hired a hooker to play a 'desperate housewife', and threw the mark a boner once a year or so.
-
Duh?
Was this ever any mystery?
I think it's clear that Ashley Madison (and many other similar dating sites) relied more on the perception of the site working than the site actually working.