5 ms·

You, sir, are moralizing just as much as anyone else. This situation is not ethically clean-cut, despite how badly you want it to be. The website's existence it

You, sir, are moralizing just as much as anyone else. This situation is not ethically clean-cut, despite how badly you want it to be. The website's existence itself is -- at the very best -- ethically and morally questionable. The hack, while technically illegal, is arguably a morally righteous act. You can't say that there is nothing ethically acceptable about sharing this data, when its very existence is ethically a gray area. Whether their actions are legal or not, some people seriously deserve to get punched in the face. That's what is happening right now in digital form to ALM.

RodericDay 11y ago
It's honestly pretty bizarre to have a giant moralizing post about how people should not moralize. I'm glad at least some people pick up on the hypocritical irony.
- inversionOf 11y ago
  tptacek is like some sort of HN version of famous (note that his post was so important that his friend dang moved it from a completely different thread from many hours earlier), and I swear that the vast majority of his posts would wallow in light grays if his name wasn't attached.
vasilipupkin 11y ago
"The website's existence itself is -- at the very best -- ethically and morally questionable". I vehemently disagree with this statement. Why is it morally and ethically questionable to facilitate private individuals finding sexual partners? Perhaps it's questionable according to your moral code, but society is not run on your personal moral code, thankfully
- robgibbons 11y ago
  Luckily, most of the entire human race agrees with me. Maybe you don't think it's inherently unethical to cheat on your partner. But it is certainly an act of questionable morality. In fact, it is literally illegal in many states: "Adultery isn't just a crime in the eyes of your spouse. In 21 states, cheating in a marriage is against the law, punishable by a fine or even jail time." You, and all of the other moral relativists can tell me I'm an extremist, or a purist, but basically I just believe in justice. You cheat, you deserve to get caught. You run a site for cheaters, you deserve to get hacked.
  - vasilipupkin 11y ago
    human race used to agree on a lot of things we find incorrect today, so that's a pretty weak argument. But that aside, does it ? Do most people agree that the website shouldn't exist ? Anal sex was illegal in some states up until recently, that doesn't mean it's a good idea for it to be illegal The website doesn't force you to cheat on your partner, you could for example, let your partner know you are on it. Some people on it are in sexless marriages, for example
    - thesagan 11y ago
      For me, at least, there is something that repulses me about the idea of a service that encourages violation of deep partner trust. It seems the opposite of "open" to me. On the other hand, I can also understand the argument for choice and privacy. But, without going deeper here, this type and method of choice and privacy stinks to my nose (if you understand my sense). I mean, seems like this site exists in a way where one partner gets hurt. Even if the partner in-the-dark doesn't know about an affair, the effects of the affair will still have an impact. The cheater may also act out more often with a false sense of security and access provided by the app. This thing is bound to be controversial, and bound to get hacked/exposed. Morals and business mix potently here.
      - vasilipupkin 11y ago
        yes, it may very well be bound to get hacked, that doesn't make the ones doing the hacking moral or ethical or anything of the sort.
        tertius 11y ago
        I disagree, since the ethics and morality of this service itself is gray, then the ethics of exposing those using the service is at least somewhat gray, whether it breaks a law or not.
        vasilipupkin 11y ago

RodericDay 11y ago

It's honestly pretty bizarre to have a giant moralizing post about how people should not moralize. I'm glad at least some people pick up on the hypocritical irony.

inversionOf 11y ago
tptacek is like some sort of HN version of famous (note that his post was so important that his friend dang moved it from a completely different thread from many hours earlier), and I swear that the vast majority of his posts would wallow in light grays if his name wasn't attached.

vasilipupkin 11y ago

"The website's existence itself is -- at the very best -- ethically and morally questionable". I vehemently disagree with this statement. Why is it morally and ethically questionable to facilitate private individuals finding sexual partners? Perhaps it's questionable according to your moral code, but society is not run on your personal moral code, thankfully

robgibbons 11y ago
Luckily, most of the entire human race agrees with me. Maybe you don't think it's inherently unethical to cheat on your partner. But it is certainly an act of questionable morality. In fact, it is literally illegal in many states: "Adultery isn't just a crime in the eyes of your spouse. In 21 states, cheating in a marriage is against the law, punishable by a fine or even jail time." You, and all of the other moral relativists can tell me I'm an extremist, or a purist, but basically I just believe in justice. You cheat, you deserve to get caught. You run a site for cheaters, you deserve to get hacked.
- vasilipupkin 11y ago
  human race used to agree on a lot of things we find incorrect today, so that's a pretty weak argument. But that aside, does it ? Do most people agree that the website shouldn't exist ? Anal sex was illegal in some states up until recently, that doesn't mean it's a good idea for it to be illegal The website doesn't force you to cheat on your partner, you could for example, let your partner know you are on it. Some people on it are in sexless marriages, for example
  - thesagan 11y ago
    For me, at least, there is something that repulses me about the idea of a service that encourages violation of deep partner trust. It seems the opposite of "open" to me. On the other hand, I can also understand the argument for choice and privacy. But, without going deeper here, this type and method of choice and privacy stinks to my nose (if you understand my sense). I mean, seems like this site exists in a way where one partner gets hurt. Even if the partner in-the-dark doesn't know about an affair, the effects of the affair will still have an impact. The cheater may also act out more often with a false sense of security and access provided by the app. This thing is bound to be controversial, and bound to get hacked/exposed. Morals and business mix potently here.
    - vasilipupkin 11y ago
      yes, it may very well be bound to get hacked, that doesn't make the ones doing the hacking moral or ethical or anything of the sort.
      - tertius 11y ago
        I disagree, since the ethics and morality of this service itself is gray, then the ethics of exposing those using the service is at least somewhat gray, whether it breaks a law or not.
        vasilipupkin 11y ago