4 ms·

Press statements aren't delivered under oath, I am not exactly going to take a press release with no details as gospel truth.

• mattmanser 11y ago
  The gizmodo reporter herself admitted she was wrong. And then launched another attack to try and hide her cockup.
  • davidgerard 11y ago
    [citation still needed]
    • pherq 11y ago
      The link is http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/09/ashley-madison-code-shows-more-women-and-more-bots/ http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/09/ashley-madison-code-shows-m... (which doesn't exactly paint Ashley Madison in glowing terms, despite the number of bots being lower than originally thought). While quite a lot more women used the service then the analyst initially thought, it is still true that AM did a lot to encourage men to pay them based on contact with fake accounts, and it apparently worked: http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/09/one-chart-that-shows-how-much-money-ashley-madison-made-using-bots/ http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/09/one-chart-that-shows-how-mu...
      • davidgerard 11y ago
        Indeed. "What I have learned from examining the site’s the source code is that Ashley Madison’s army of fembots appears to have been a sophisticated, deliberate, and lucrative fraud. The code tells the story of a company trying to weave the illusion that women on the site were plentiful and eager. Whatever the total number of real, active female Ashley Madison users is, the company was clearly on a desperate quest to design legions of fake women to interact with the men on the site." Ashley Madison was still a sad, exploitative scam.