12 ms·
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 "ope
by 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 agoyes, 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 agoI 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 agothat seems like fallacious reasoning to me. Ethics of cigarette industry are possibly grey, that doesn't mean it's ethical for you to break into their offices and steal their coffee maker.
- tertius 11y agoBut exposing their ethics and who tried to hide the fact that smoking has been linked to cancer, that is gray.